*1 115 court find that the district We also in the upholding its discretion VALLEY, al.,

did not abuse Virgie et Lee Although testificandum. subpoenas ad Plaintiffs-Appellees, whether its raised the issue of TCP has not America, States of United subpoenaed, GHR properly was president Intervenor-Appellee, subpoenas of its argues that the vigorously be are burdensome overly three officers v. “against virtually all they

cause are issued BOARD, PARISH SCHOOL et RAPIDES necessary and es management of the staff al., Defendants-Appellants, functioning of the day sential for the to day and Brief for at 5-6. We company.” GHR for the have noted that counsel already Holloway, al., Clyde et testimony has offered to schedule the Board Intervenors-Appellants. possible for convenient times so the most No. 81-3462. would not have company that the officers of Appeals, United States Court hearing. attending to waste time the entire Fifth Circuit. amounts to little objection therefore GHR’s more desire not to have its officers than a 26, May 1983. think, however, at that the testify all. We Ward, Jr., La., Rouge, John F. Baton for comply subpoe that must with parties fact Rapides. sort of trial and every nas is “incident to living of under of the social burden part [is] Alexandria, La., for Christopher Roy, Service, government.” New Orleans Public Holloway, et al. 160, Brown, (5th 165 Inc. v. 507 F.2d Cir. La., Baier, Rouge, Paul R. Baton for Hol- 1975) Lumber Co. v. (quoting Bradley loway, et al. NLRB, 97, (5th Cir.1936), 84 F.2d 100 cert. Alexandria, La., Valley, for Berry, Louis 559, 21, denied, 299 57 81 L.Ed. U.S. S.Ct. et al. (1936)). 411 Marshall, Litigation Franz R. Gen. Sec- that the trial court cor- We also conclude tion, Div., Rights Dimsey, Dennis J. Civil abuse its applied the law and did not rectly Div., Section, Rights Dept, Appellate Civil subpoenas ordering in that the discretion D.C., Justice, William Brad- Washington, of tecum and ad testificandum be en- duces in- Reynolds, Landsberg, ford Brian K. for forced. tervenor, U.S.A. 38, Fed.R.App.P. We conclude that applicable is “Damages Delay,”

entitled for we award double costs to appeal

to the and

the Board.

AFFIRMED. PETITION FOR REHEARING AND ON FOR REHEARING SUGGESTION

' EN BANC 30, Cir., 1983, (Opinion March 5 702 1221) F.2d CLARK, Judge, POLITZ Before Chief RANDALL, Judges. and Circuit PER CURIAM: Rehearing Rapides for of The Petition denied, Board, 702 et al. is Parish School panel this nor and no member of F.2d 1221 *2 116 the active service on Court

Judge regular in polled the be that Court

having requested banc, (Rule 35 Federal en rehearing

on Procedure; Local Fifth Appellate

Rules of for Rehear- 16) Suggestion the Rule

Circuit is denied.

ing En Banc

CLARK, Judge: Chief my in dissent to

For the reasons stated from the denial opinion,

the I dissent panel rehearing.

LOUISIANA ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIE Chance,

TY, Mrs. Vernon B. INC. and

Sr., Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v. DOLE, Secretary

Elizabeth Hanford of

Transportation, Defendant-Appellant, Highways,

Department of State of

Louisiana, Defendant-Appellant.

LOUISIANA ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIE

TY, Chance, INC. and Mrs. Vernon B.

Sr., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. DOLE, Secretary Hanford

Elizabeth

Department Transportation, Et of

Al., Defendants-Appellees. 81-3784,

Nos. 82-3042. Appeals,

United Court of States

Fifth Circuit. 26,

May 1983.

Rehearing Rehearing and En Banc 19,1983. July

Denied