Findings of fact12/13/2023 Thus, Smith should be treated as a party for purposes of Rule 65(d).ħ. When the Court approved the modification, it made Smith a party to the modified decree - the decree that was violated. Moreover, in 1996, Smith went to the Court seeking modification of the decree to allow it to purchase Anchor. those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the order by personal service or otherwise." Although Smith was not a party to the original action filed in 1993, it agreed to be bound when it purchased the divested drilling fluid business in 1994. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d) states that an injunction binds "the parties to the action, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and. This power is based both on the Court's inherent power to enforce its orders and its authority under Paragraph XIV of the Final Judgment to punish violations of the decree.Ħ. This Court has the power to hold Smith and Schlumberger in civil and criminal contempt. Respondents have admitted that this Court has jurisdiction to enforce the Final Judgment and jurisdiction to determine whether the joint venture consummated on Jviolates the Final Judgment. Jurisdiction is retained by this Court for the purpose of enabling any of the parties to this Final Judgment to apply to this Court at any time for such further orders and directions as may be necessary or appropriate for the construction or carrying out of this Final Judgment, for the modification of any provision hereof, for the enforcement of compliance herewith, and for the punishment of any violations hereof.Ĥ. § 401(3), which provides in relevant part: This Court has jurisdiction over the criminal contempt petition based on 18 U.S.C. This Court has jurisdiction over the civil contempt petition because of its inherent power to enforce compliance with its orders. Pursuant to the Court's directions, the United States hereby submits its proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The petitions were tried jointly on November 17-19 and 22-24, 1999, with the Honorable Stanley Sporkin presiding. in April of 1994 and modified in September of 1996. be found in civil and criminal contempt of violating the Final Judgment entered by this Court in United States v. On July 27, 1999, the United States filed Petitions with this Court asking that Smith International, Inc. SMITH INTERNATIONAL, INC., and SCHLUMBERGER LTD., Respondents. _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |