How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask richanne96 Your Own Question
richanne96
richanne96, Attorney
Category: Personal Injury Law
Satisfied Customers: 284
Experience:  Attorney in private practice in Phoenix, AZ
69015496
Type Your Personal Injury Law Question Here...
richanne96 is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

protective order

This answer was rated:

I am a pro se plaintiff in a federal lawsuit who filed "en forma paupers." The case was filed in my state but removed to another state. I cannot find an example of a case where the plaintiff was granted a protective order from having to travel to the other state when a video or speakerphone deposition would substitute. Can you tell me how i could go about defending my motion to quash and protective order? I was wondering if anyone could point me to any similar case, where a pro se plaintiff was granted a motion to quash because of undue expense of the travel expenses of the deposition, and there being available alternatives. Thank you


richanne96 :

Has the defendant actually subpoenaed you to testify out-of-state? And you filed a motion to quash the subpoena? If so, Rule 45(c)(3)(iv) allows the court to quash or modify a subpoena that "subjects a person to undue burden." This would be your argument. Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) deals with having to travel more than 100 miles. There is a case in Ohio on that -- Avante Intern. Technology Corp. v. Diebold Election Systems, 2007 WL(NNN) NNN-NNNN(N.D. Ohio 2007). However, that rule only pertains to non-parties in the case. The witness in that case also argued undue burden under subsection iv, but the court found that it did not need to go there since there was grounds to quash the subpoena under subsection ii. I would argue that in this case, subsection ii may not apply, but subsection iv does.

Customer:

they filed a notice, not a subpoena

Customer:

when i said somethign about that, they told me that rule only applies to non parties? that since im the plaintiff in the case, i have to go.

Customer:

does the rule hold up for a notice as well as subpoena?

Customer:

i have not filed a motion to quash yet, but plan to today

Customer:

another attorney told me it matters that i originally filed this in my state until they had it removed, is that right?

richanne96 :

No, you do not need to quash a notice. A notice is merely a notice.

Customer:

so i dont quash that? dont i need to object to it?

richanne96 :

Yes, it matter that you originally filed in your own state, the other attorney is right on that.

richanne96 :

You do not need a motion to quash unless they issue a subpoena.

richanne96 :

If you do not show up for their noticed deposition, it is up to them to file a motion to compel you to do so.

Customer:

oh ok, then i dont have to do anything

Customer:

than you

richanne96 :

No, you do not need to do anything, but you should speak with the other side about attempting to schedule your deposition in your home state, and maybe, like you said, setting up a video conference.

Customer:

maybe ill file a protective order though, in anticipation of that..ok thank you :)


 

richanne96 and 2 other Personal Injury Law Specialists are ready to help you