## Facts

- The IRS investigated the tax liabilities of Lester J. Robinson, president and sole shareholder of Darwin Construction Company, Inc.
- The IRS served an administrative summons on Robinson as a corporate officer, demanding 25 categories of Darwin’s business records for 1980–1983 and related corporate records.
- Darwin, through counsel, refused production based on Robinson’s Fifth Amendment “act of production” privilege.
- The government petitioned to enforce the summons; Robinson intervened and renewed the Fifth Amendment claim.
- The district court ordered Darwin, as a corporation, to comply with the summons (through a representative other than Robinson if necessary).
- On June 23, 1986, the court entered an enforcement order requiring production and imposing a coercive civil-contempt sanction of $5,000 per day for any post-order noncompliance.
- Darwin produced some records on June 24; the IRS notified Darwin on June 27 that production was incomplete; Darwin produced the remaining documents on June 30.
- The court found Darwin either knew the June 24 production was incomplete or made no meaningful effort to verify completeness; the missing records were within Darwin’s possession and control.
- The court held Darwin in civil contempt for six days (June 24–30) and assessed $30,000 in per diem fines.
- Darwin moved to set aside or reduce the $30,000 fine, arguing substantial compliance, good-faith efforts, and that the fine improperly punished pre-order conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether Darwin’s asserted substantial compliance and good-faith efforts after the June 23 enforcement order required setting aside or reducing the $30,000 civil-contempt fine.
2. Whether the six-day per diem sanction was an impermissible punishment for pre–June 23 conduct rather than a coercive sanction tied to post-order noncompliance.

## Decision

- The court denied Darwin’s motion to set aside or reduce the civil-contempt fine.
- The court held Darwin did not carry its burden to show substantial compliance or factual inability to comply despite all reasonable efforts.
- The court concluded the per diem fine accrued only for post-order noncompliance (June 24–30) and was coercive rather than punitive.
- The court left in place the $30,000 assessment ($5,000 per day for six days).

## Legal Principles

- A party subject to a coercive civil-contempt order must make all reasonable efforts to comply; partial or delayed compliance does not automatically relieve accrued per diem fines.
- The contemnor bears a difficult burden to prove either substantial compliance or factual impossibility of compliance despite diligent, good-faith efforts.
- Civil-contempt sanctions are proper when they are keyed to post-order noncompliance and structured so the contemnor can avoid or limit the sanction through timely compliance.
- Disorganization, misfiling, or generalized claims of difficulty do not excuse noncompliance where responsive documents remain within the party’s control.

## Conclusion

The court sustained a $30,000 coercive civil-contempt fine for six days of post-order noncompliance with an IRS summons, holding that Darwin failed to prove substantial compliance or inability to comply and that the per diem sanction properly targeted continued nonproduction after a clear enforcement order.


United States v. Darwin Construction Co., 680 F. Supp. 739 (D. Md. 1988)