Forte v. Jones

Filing 174

ORDER DIRECTING Corey Pride to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed based on his failure to appear as required by subpoena. Corey Pride is ORDERED to appear on 6/6/2014 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 2 (AWI) before District Judge Anthony W. Ishi i to address the reason for his absence and to address such other matter as may pertain to this case. Order signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 6/5/2014. (Counsel for Corey Pride, Karl Olson, telephonically and, via email, served with a copy of this order. Mr. Olson was also informed that he is to be telephonically available at the same date and time, to address the Court. The Court will place the call to Mr. Olson.)(Rooney, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

12
13

EUGENE FORTE,

14

Plaintiff,

15
16

v.
TOMMY JONES, et al.,

17

No. 1:11-cv-00718-AWI-BAM
ORDER DIRECTING COREY PRIDE TO
SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS
SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED BASE ON
HIS FAILURE TO APPEAR AS
REQUIRED BY SUBPOENA

Defendant.

18
A subpoena was issued ordering Corey Pride to appear on June 3, 2014 at 8:30 a.m., for

19
20

the trial in the above referenced matter. Doc. 151-6.
A subpoena shall “command each person to whom it is directed to attend and give

21
22

testimony or to produce and permit inspection and copying of designated books, documents or

23

tangible things in the possession, custody or control of that person.” F.R. Civ. P. 45(a) (1)(iii).

24

The issuing court may hold a person in contempt for failing to obey a subpoena. F.R. Civ. P.

25

45(g).

26

A civil contempt sanction is designed to force the contemnors to comply with an order of

27

the court and thus to affect discovery. Cunningham v. Hamilton County, Ohio, 527 U.S. 198, 207,

28

119 S.Ct. 1915, 144 L.Ed.2d 184 (1999). Civil contempt in this is designed to curtail
1

1

disobedience of a specific and definite court order where a person has failed to take all reasonable

2

steps to comply. Falstaff Brewing Corp. v. Miller Brewing Co., 702 F.2d 778 (9th Cir.1983).

3

Courts have inherent power to enforce their orders through civil contempt. See Spallone v. United

4

States, 493 U.S. 265, 276, 110 S.Ct. 625, 107 L.Ed.2d 644 (1990), citing Shillitani v. United

5

States, 384 U.S. 364, 370, 86 S.Ct. 1531, 16 L.Ed.2d 622 (1966. A district court has wide latitude

6

in determining whether there has been a contemptuous defiance of one of its orders. Stone v. City

7

of San Francisco, 968 F.2d 850, 856 (9th Cir.1992).

8
9

On June 5, 2014, Mr. Pride was called as a witness but, as represented to the Court by Mr.
Forte, Mr. Pride was not present. At approximately 1:37 p.m. on June 5, 2014, this Court

10

indicated that it would issue an order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed. The

11

Court notes that Mr. Pride’s counsel filed a document entitled “Objection to Subpoena” at 9:33

12

a.m. on June 5, 2014. Doc. 171. A filing objecting to subpoena on the date of the required

13

attendance is neither the proper vehicle for challenging a subpoena nor is it a timely challenge to

14

the subpoena. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(3).

15

Mr. Pride was required to be present but failed to appear.

16

Failure to comply with this order may result in sanctions. See Eastern District Local Rule

17
18

110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.
Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that Corey Pride show cause for his failure to appear in

19

compliance with subpoena. Mr. Pride is further ORDERED to appear on Friday, June 6, 2014, at

20

11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2 to address the reason for his absence and to address such other matters

21

as may pertain to this case.

22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 5, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
27
28
2