Eastmoor Estates Residents Association et al v. Miller et al

Filing 202

ORDER denying 195 Motion to Quash; denying 197 Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by Jane M Virden on 1/9/12. (ncb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
EASTMOOR ESTATES RESIDENTS
ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

PLAINTIFFS

vs.

CAUSE NO. 4:10CV144-P-V

GLENN MILLER, ET AL.

DEFENDANT

ORDER
Before the court are the Miller defendants’ motion to quash subpoena duces tecum (# 195) and
amended motion to quash subpoena duces tecum (# 197). The court has thoroughly considered the
matter, and without the need of a response from plaintiffs, finds the motions should be denied. The
defendants seek an order quashing a subpoena served on their accounting firm by plaintiffs and a
protective order prohibiting discovery of records held by said firm. In support of the amended motion,
defendants assert that in Mississippi there is a statutory privilege for, inter alia, communications

between a client and his accountant pursuant to MISS. CODE ANN. 73-33-16 (2).
The motion is denied. As an initial matter, the Mississippi Supreme Court has held that
statutory privileges were abrogated by the adoption of MISS. R. EVID. 501. See Hughes v. Tupelo
Oil Co., 510 So.2d 501 (Miss. 1987). Furthermore, in a case such as this where the court has
jurisdiction based on a federal question, federal law determines the existence of a privilege. See
Gilbreath v. Guadalupe Hospital Foundation, Inc., 5 F.3d 785, 791 (5th Cir. 1993). This is also the
case in actions involving both a federal question and pendent state law claims. See Reed v. City of
Greenwood, No. 4:02cv287, 2006 WL 717492, at * 1 (N.D. Miss. March 21, 2006). Accordingly,

§ 73-33-16 does not apply in this case.
SO ORDERED this, the 9th day of January, 2012.

/s/ Jane M. Virden
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2