UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
March 7, 2008
BOOTH OIL SITE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP, PLAINTIFF,
GEORGE T. BOOTH, JR., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Richard J. Arcara Chief Judge United States District Court
DECISION AND ORDER
On February 21, 2008, defendant Ahsen Yelkin filed objections to a subpoena duces tecum issued to him on behalf of plaintiff Booth Oil Site Administrative Group ("BOSAG"). Similarly, on February 22, 2008, defendant Joseph Chalhoub filed objections to a subpoena duces tecum issued to him on behalf of BOSAG. On March 5, 2008, BOSAG filed a response to the objections.
After reviewing the submissions of the parties, the Court denies the defendants' objections. "While a Rule 45 subpoena is typically used to obtain the production of documents and/or testimony from a non-party to an action (whereas Rules 26-37 provide simpler means for obtaining the same from a party), nothing in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure explicitly precludes the use of Rule 45 subpoenas against parties." First City, Texas-Houston, N.A. v. Rafidain Bank, 197 F.R.D. 250, 254 n.5 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (citing Badman v. Stark, 139 F.R.D. 601, 603 (M.D. Pa. 1991) ("Rule 34 applies only to parties to the lawsuit, while a subpoena under Rule 45 may be served upon both party and non-party witnesses.")). Accordingly, the Court hereby orders defendants Yelkin and Chalhoub to comply with the subpoenas duces tecum.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.