Noel v. Liberty Bank of Arkansas

Filing 81

ORDER denying 75 Motion to Quash. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 10/16/2012. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION VIRGINIA MCKEE NOEL v. PLAINTIFF No. 3:10CV00107 JLH LIBERTY BANK OF ARKANSAS DEFENDANT ORDER Kemp & Company has filed a motion to quash or modify a subpoena issued by the plaintiff in this action. Kemp & Company cites Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(iii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the proposition that a court must quash or modify a subpoena that requires disclosure of privileged or other protected matter. “Some of the documents requested in the subpoena are confidential.” Kemp & Company asserts, without however, describing the nature of the documents or explaining what about them is confidential. A protective order is, as Kemp & Company notes, in place. That order protects trade secrets and other information the confidentiality or privacy of which is protected by statute. Kemp & Company says, “[w]hile the information being requested is highly confidential, it does not fall within either of those categories.” Kemp & Company has presented nothing but conclusory assertions that the documents are confidential and that the protective order currently in place is insufficient. The burden of persuasion in a motion to quash a subpoena issued during the course of civil litigation is on the moving party. United States v. Int’l Bus. Mach. Corp., 83 F.R.D. 97, 104 (S.D.N.Y. 1979). Kemp & Company has not met that burden. The motion to quash or modify is therefore DENIED. Document #75. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of October, 2012. J. LEON HOLMES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?