Hill v. Star et al
ORDER re: subpoenas of non-party witnesses. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 06/09/2015. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/9/2015)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
TION ALONZO HILL,
JOSHUA ARNOLD, et al.,
Case No. 09-cv-05434-TEH
ORDER RE: SUBPOENAS OF NONPARTY WITNESSES
On the first day of trial, it was brought to the Court’s attention that Plaintiff may
United States District Court
Northern District of California
have served subpoenas for certain non-party witnesses’ attendance at trial on the San
Francisco Mayor’s Office, even though the witnesses are officers of the San Francisco
“Serving a subpoena requires delivering a copy to the named person . . . .” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 45(b)(1). “The longstanding interpretation of Rule 45 has been that personal
service of subpoenas is required.” 9A Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal
Practice and Procedure § 2454 (3d ed. 2015); see also Chima v. U.S. Dep’t of Def., 23 F.
App’x 721, 724 (9th Cir. 2001); In re Smith, 126 F.R.D. 461, 462 (E.D.N.Y. 1989).
Considering the authorities cited above, the Court is not convinced that it has the
authority to compel the attendance of any improperly served witnesses. Should this issue
remain unresolved by the parties at the time for any allegedly improperly served witness to
testify, Plaintiff is instructed to promptly file a motion with citations to authority in support
of his actions and requested relief.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THELTON E. HENDERSON
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?