10 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Ryan

    402 U.S. 530 (1971)   Cited 445 times
    Holding that the respondent may refuse to comply with an order for production before a grand jury and litigate those issues if contempt or similar proceedings are brought against him; if his contentions are rejected by the trial court, they will only then be ripe for appellate review
  2. Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.

    392 F.3d 812 (5th Cir. 2004)   Cited 403 times
    Holding that the district court erred in quashing a subpoena without providing justification
  3. Cmedia, LLC v. LifeKey Healthcare, LLC

    216 F.R.D. 387 (N.D. Tex. 2003)   Cited 85 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Company in the business of placing advertising in media outlets brought suit for breach of contract against purchaser of advertising bookings. On non-party's motion for protective order, the District Court, Ramirez, United States Magistrate Judge, held that: (1) plaintiff's request to nonparty for production of all documents showing prices charged by television stations or networks for advertising placed by nonparty for defendant, would be allowed as relevant to counterclaim alleging that plaintiff

  4. Hussey v. State Farm Lloyds Ins. Co.

    216 F.R.D. 591 (E.D. Tex. 2003)   Cited 34 times
    Holding the plaintiff met relevance burden, but neither the defendant nor the expert made a showing of undue burden or expense
  5. Covey Oil Company v. Continental Oil Company

    340 F.2d 993 (10th Cir. 1965)   Cited 113 times
    Upholding a protective order that restricted access to sensitive documents to counsel and independent certified public accountants and prohibited use of the materials for competitive purposes
  6. Edgefield Holdings v. Gilbert

    No. 3:17-mc-74-N-BN (N.D. Tex. Mar. 2, 2018)   Cited 1 times

    No. 3:17-mc-74-N-BN 03-02-2018 EDGEFIELD HOLDINGS as successor in interest to Regions Bank, Plaintiff, v. KENNETH J. GILBERT, et al., Defendants. DAVID L. HORAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Kenneth J. Gilbert and Non-Party Helen K. Gilbert (collectively, the "Gilberts") have filed a Motion to Quash Subpoena and Objection to Document Requests in response to a subpoena (the "Subpoena" [Dkt. No. 15, Ex. 1]) issued to Non-Party Helen K. Gilbert by Plaintiff Edgefield

  7. Manookian v. Mervis

    Civil Action No. 4:17-mc-00056 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 11, 2017)   Cited 1 times
    Denying motion to compel third party where requests sought all documents related to the defendant without limitation
  8. Collins v. Trans Union, LLC

    Civil Action No. 14-cv-00742-RBJ-NYW (D. Colo. Apr. 28, 2015)

    Civil Action No. 14-cv-00742-RBJ-NYW 04-28-2015 MICHAEL A. COLLINS, Plaintiff, v. TRANS UNION, LLC, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., and EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC, Defendants. Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH This matter is before the Court on Wakefield & Associates, Inc.'s ("Wakefield") Motion to Quash Subpoena to Produce Issued to Wakefield and Associates, Inc. ("Motion to Quash"). [#105, filed January 28, 2015]. Pursuant to the Order Referring Case dated September

  9. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 93,834 times   640 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
  10. Rule 45 - Subpoena

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 45   Cited 16,338 times   100 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"