United States of America and Martin Hoffenblum, Special Agent of the Internal Revenue Service v. George Cromer

The district court entered an order granting enforcement of an Internal Revenue Service summons pursuant to Int.Rev.Code of 1954, § 7602, and this appeal followed. We affirm.

Special Agent Hoffenblum began investigating the tax liabilities of Brooks Rent A Car, Inc. and its president, Irving Bell, in 1968. On April 18, 1972, Hoffenblum issued an IRS summons to Cromer, the attorney for Brooks and Bell, directing him to testify concerning his clients’ tax liabilities for the years 1965 through 1968. Cromer refused to testify, asserting the illegality of the summons and claiming such testimony would violate the attorney-client privilege and the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.

Cromer correctly states that the summons will not be enforced if: (1) issued subsequent to a recommendation for criminal prosecution, or (2) used solely for gathering information for a criminal prosecution. See Donaldson v. United States, 400 U.S. 517, 533, 536 , 91 S.Ct. 534 , 27 L.Ed.2d 580 (1971); Wild v. United States, 362 F.2d 206, 208-209 (9th Cir. 1966). However, neither impediment exists here.

Donaldson holds that the summons must be “issued in good faith and prior to a recommendation for criminal…