Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A subpoena duces tecum (pronounced in English / s ə ˈ p iː n ə ˌ dj uː s iː z ˈ t iː k ə m / sə-PEE-nə DEW-seez TEE-kəm), or subpoena for production of evidence, is a court summons ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial. In some jurisdictions ...
United States v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000), was a United States Supreme Court case involving Webster Hubbell, who had been indicted on various tax-related charges, and mail and wire fraud charges, based on documents that the government had subpoenaed from him. [1]
Agora, Inc., 882 A.2d 833 (2005), [16] pursuant to an investigation into potential violations of Maryland securities laws, the Maryland Securities Commissioner served two subpoenas duces tecum on Agora. [16]
American Lithographic Co. v. Werkmeister, 221 U.S. 603 (1911), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a corporation defendant in a suit to enforce copyright infringement penalties is not entitled to a Fourth or Fifth Amendment objection to the admission of its bookkeeping entries into evidence when they are produced ...
In New South Wales, a court may set aside the whole, or part, of a subpoena on the basis that it is a "fishing expedition".In Lowery v Insurance Australia Ltd, the NSW Court of Appeal held that where documents requested in the schedule of a subpoena are deemed to have no relevance to the proceedings in dispute, the subpoena may be set aside as it has no legitimate forensic purpose.
When the defendant appeared, both the plaintiff and his witnesses, and the defendant and any witnesses which he might produce, were examined by the Chancellor. Production of documents could be demanded via subpoena duces tecum. It has been suggested that the writ subpoena was very similar to the bill of Eyre.
The Court rejected the "good faith" standard applied in In re Subpoena Duces Tecum to America Online on the basis that it offered "no practical, reliable way to determine the plaintiff's good faith and leaves the speaker with little protection." The Court also rejected the four-part test applied in Dendrite International, Inc. v. Doe No. 3. [4]
In an early case, the Circuit Court of Virginia applied this standard in In re Subpoena Duces Tecum to America Online, holding that a court may compel an ISP to reveal a subscriber's identity if it finds "that the party requesting the subpoena has a legitimate, good faith basis to contend that it may be the victim of conduct actionable in the ...