Cownie v. Church of Scientology
ORDER denying 1 plaintiff's motion to quash. Signed by Chief District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. on 1/29/10. (Enss, Rhonda)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM G. COWNIE, II Plaintiff, v. CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. 10-MC-09005-W-FJG
On January 21, 2010, the Court held a telephone conference with the parties on plaintiff's Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum served by defendant on William G. Cownie (Doc. # 1). After consideration of the parties' arguments, the Court hereby ORDERS plaintiff to produce all non-privileged documents requested by defendant related to Case No. 0716-CV13253 filed in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri as well as all nonprivileged documents sought by defendant in the separate case arising from the same incident as described in paragraph eight of plaintiff's Motion to Quash. Defendant shall serve plaintiff with a subpoena describing the documents defendant is requesting that plaintiff produce. Within a reasonable time after service of the subpoena, plaintiff shall serve defendant with his written response, specifying the documents he is prepared to produce and setting forth any objections he may have and shall promptly mail to defendant a copy of the documents he indicates he has agreed to produce. In addition to written objections, plaintiff shall provide defendant a privilege log describing all responsive documents plaintiff is withholding from production on account
of any claim of privilege. Plaintiff shall be entitled to the reasonable costs incurred in responding to the subpoena, including copying and mailing costs. Accordingly, plaintiff's Motion to Quash is hereby DENIED (Doc. # 1).
Date: January 29, 2010 Kansas City, Missouri
S/ FERNANDO J. GAITAN, JR. Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr. Chief 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?