Remove Discovery Remove Litigation Remove Subpoenas
article thumbnail

“No Dog in the Fight” Analysis Applies to Scope of Subpoenas in the District of Maryland

E-Discovery LLC

the Court set out and applied the principles governing subpoenas and objections to them. The individual defendants in Hall issued a subpoena to MAIP. The subpoena sought approximately 18 years of data (2005 2023) and all records in MAIPs possession related to its representation of Plaintiff. Baltimore Police Dept.,

Subpoenas 130
article thumbnail

What “Expenses” Can a Non-Party Recover for Complying With a Discovery Subpoena?

E-Discovery LLC

20, 2024), the court addressed recovery of expenses by non-parties for responding to a subpoena. 45 (“Subpoena”) states: (b)(1) – Under some circumstances, witness fees and mileage must be paid. [1] It is alleged that the documents were then used by the mother in litigation against the sole member of OLPC. Fed.R.Civ.P.

Subpoenas 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Who Can Object to a Subpoena?

E-Discovery LLC

In doing so, FGH propounded discovery. In pertinent part, FGH served 20 subpoenas on third-party financial institutions. 2005); see also In re Grand Jury Subpoena John Doe, No. Breach Litig., Defendants have not plausibly asserted any privilege, proprietary interest, or personal interest in the subpoenaed matter.

Subpoenas 130
article thumbnail

What Objections May Be Raised to a Subpoena by a Non-Party?

E-Discovery LLC

July 22, 2024), the Court addressed the type of objections that a subpoenaed non-party may make. That was a novel issue in Maryland. The Court held “that [nonparty] TST had standing to challenge the subpoena on grounds that some of the requests were overbroad and not relevant to the subject matter involved in the divorce action.”

Subpoenas 130
article thumbnail

The Little Engine That Could – Discovery of Litigation Funding Denied

E-Discovery LLC

27, 2024), the court rejected defendant’s effort to discover documents sent by plaintiff to a litigation funder that permitted the lender to evaluate the value of plaintiff’s claims. Design sought and obtained litigation financing from Validity Finance. In Design With Friends, Inc. Target Corporation , 2024 WL 433114 (D.

article thumbnail

No Privilege Log is Necessary in Limited Circumstances When Discovery Requests Are Overbroad

E-Discovery LLC

In previous blogs, I addressed decisions holding that Where Requests for Discovery were Overly Broad, No Privilege Log was Required (Oct. 12, 2024); No Privilege Log Is Needed While Scope of Discovery Objections Are Pending (Aug. Both Mr. Hall and MAIP objected to the subpoena on a number of bases. Baltimore Police Dept.,

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Discovery Dispute: “Both cannot be true.”

E-Discovery LLC

When it came to discovery, it wasn’t. Tekvantage and Teknowledgies are not parties to this litigation. Krantz issued third-party subpoenas to Tekvantage and Teknowledgies. RFP 1: “NO SUCH DOCUMENTS EXIST” Generally, when an attorney signs a discovery response under Fed.R.Civ.P. Lain also owned Tekvantage, Inc.

Discovery 130