542 F. App'x 944
Fed. Cir.2013Background
- Starr International Co. sues the United States in the Claims Court over the 2008 AIG bailout and alleged takings/ statutory claims related to Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act.
- Starr seeks to depose Ben S. Bernanke regarding the Fed’s decision-making in the AIG rescue.
- The government moves for a protective order to block Bernanke’s deposition.
- The Claims Court had allowed Bernanke’s deposition but with the trial judge present; Starr could depose him.
- The government petitions this court for a writ of mandamus to vacate the protective order.
- The facts include a term sheet: $85 billion secured credit, ~14.5% annual interest, and government control/equity stake in AIG.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandamus is proper to overturn the protective order on Bernanke’s deposition. | Starr seeks necessary testimony from a key decision-maker. | Mandamus warranted to protect high-ranking officials from disruptive discovery. | Mandamus granted; protective order vacated. |
| Whether extraordinary circumstances justify deposing a current high-ranking official. | Bernanke’s testimony is essential due to personal involvement. | No extraordinary circumstances shown; current official; risk of disruption. | Not established; deposition should be delayed/postponed. |
| Whether Morgan framework limits inquiry into deliberative processes or mental states of officials. | Aiming to probe deliberative processes and mental state relevant to the case. | Morgan requires extraordinary circumstances for such inquiries. | Not met; Morgan controls; no disclosure of deliberative/mental processes. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Morgan, 313 U.S. 409 (1941) (deliberative-process protection for high officials; extraordinary circumstances required)
- In re United States (Jackson), 624 F.3d 1368 (11th Cir.2010) (mandamus review to prevent deposition of high officials)
- In re Cheney, 544 F.3d 311 (D.C. Cir.2008) (protective orders against high-ranking officials; extraordinary circumstances)
- In re Sec. Exch. Comm’n, 374 F.3d 184 (2d Cir.2004) (limits on deposition of officials; extraordinary circumstances)
- In re United States (Holder), 197 F.3d 310 (8th Cir.1999) (special need for deposition of high official; extraordinary circumstances)
- Kessler v. United States, 985 F.2d 510 (11th Cir.1993) (burden to show necessity of deposition of high official)
- Bogan v. City of Boston, 489 F.3d 417 (1st Cir.2007) (burden to show extraordinary circumstances; limits on official deposition)
- Holder v. U.S., ... (...) (placeholder)