4 Cited authorities

  1. Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

    392 F.3d 812 (5th Cir. 2004)   Cited 229 times
    Holding that the district court erred in quashing a subpoena without providing justification
  2. MetroPCS v. Thomas

    327 F.R.D. 600 (N.D. Tex. 2018)   Cited 5 times

    [Copyrighted Material Omitted] Ralph C. Perry-Miller, April Renee Terry, Gray Reed & McGraw PC, Dallas, TX, James B. Baldinger, Stacey K. Sutton, Carlton Fields Jorden Burt PA, West Palm Beach, FL, for Plaintiff. Gary N. Schepps, Schepps Law Offices, Dallas, TX, for Movant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DAVID L. HORAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Non-party Lorraine Frazin has filed a Motion to Quash Subpoena and for Supplemental Relief [Dkt. No. 1 (the "Motion to Quash") ] under Federal Rules of

  3. Rule 45 - Subpoena

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 45   Cited 10,928 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"
  4. Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 34   Cited 9,087 times   105 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."