Hanna v. Mariposa County Sheriff Dept. et al

Filing 116

ORDER DENYING 114 Plaintiff's Motion for Subpoena Duces Tecum signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 7/7/2014. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD CHARLES HANNA, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM Plaintiff, 12 13 Case No. 1:12-cv-00501-AWI-SAB v. (ECF No. 114) 14 MARIPOSA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 On September 10, 2013, default was entered against Defendants Mariposa County Sheriff Department, and Deputies Boehm, King, Remeriz, and Rumfelt. (ECF No. 39.) On September 30, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for a subpoena duces tecum for his use in moving for default judgment against the defendants in this action. (ECF No. 42.) The Court granted Plaintiff’s motion, however prior to an order being issued to have the subpoena served, the Court discovered that there was an issue of res judicata due to a similar suit being filed and the order granting Plaintiff’s motion was vacated. Subsequently on January 23, 2014, the default was set aside. (ECF No. 96.) On July 7, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to have the court serve the subpoena duces tecum. (ECF No. 114.) As Plaintiff has been informed, discovery has not opened in this action. Once the district judge issues a final order on Defendants’ motion to dismiss, a mandatory scheduling conference 28 1 1 will take place. After the scheduling conference, a scheduling order will issue setting the dates 2 during which the parties will conduct discovery. At that time, Plaintiff will have the opportunity 3 to request the sought after discovery from Defendants. Subject to certain requirements set forth herein, Plaintiff may be entitled to the issuance 4 5 of a subpoena commanding the production of documents from non-parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. 6 However, the Court will consider granting such a request only if the documents sought from the 7 non-party are discoverable, are not equally available to Plaintiff, and are not obtainable from 8 Defendants through a request for production of documents. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 34. 10 Plaintiff is entitled to seek discovery of any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to his 11 claims. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1). The discovery sought may include information that is not 12 admissible as long as it appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible 13 evidence. Id. In order to obtain a subpoena duces tecum, Plaintiff must inform the court of the 14 purpose of the subpoena. A request for the issuance of a records subpoena requires Plaintiff to: 15 (1) identify with specificity the documents sought and from whom, and (2) make a showing that 16 the records are only obtainable through that third party. 17 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a subpoena duces tecum is HEREBY DENIED. 18 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 7, 2014 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?