From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Arbitration of Hicks v. the Cadle Company

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Mar 1, 2006
No. 3:06MC9-MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2006)

Opinion

No. 3:06MC9-MU.

March 1, 2006


ORDER


This matter is before the court upon motion of nonparties Tamara Massey, Alice Byrd, Stowe Query, and Bank of America to quash certain subpoenas issued to them and for a protective order barring the discovery Respondents seek. The subpoenas were issued to Massey, Byrd, and Query directing their appearance at prehearing depositions and directing them to produce Bank of America documents. In COMSTAT Corp. v. National Science Foundation, 190 F.3d 269 (4th Cir. 1999), the Fourth Circuit held that arbitrators (and district courts acting in aid of arbitration) do not have authority to issue subpoenas to nonparties for prehearing depositions or documents production. Moreover, Respondents fail to show any special need or hardship, or any "extraordinary circumstances" which might permit a court to compel pre-arbitration discovery. See id. at 276;Deiulemar Compagnia Di Navigazione S.p.A. v. M/V Allegra, 198 F.3d 473, 481 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly,

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion to Quash is hereby GRANTED.


Summaries of

In the Arbitration of Hicks v. the Cadle Company

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Mar 1, 2006
No. 3:06MC9-MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2006)
Case details for

In the Arbitration of Hicks v. the Cadle Company

Case Details

Full title:IN THE ARBITRATION OF: KERRY R. HICKS, Claimant, v. THE CADLE COMPANY…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

Date published: Mar 1, 2006

Citations

No. 3:06MC9-MU (W.D.N.C. Mar. 1, 2006)