Source: https://www.rcfp.org/privilege-sections/7-civil-criminal-rules-of-procedure/
Timestamp: 2019-10-19 04:28:43
Document Index: 212858493

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1986', '§ 1986', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 15', '§22', 'art. 38', '§5']

7. Civil/criminal rules of procedure Archives - The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Rule 45(d) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure requires a judge to modify or quash a subpoena upon timely motion and impose sanctions upon the seeking party if the subpoena subjects a person to “undue burden.” Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure authorizes the judge to quash a criminal subpoena if “compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”
In civil cases, Rule 45 authorizes a court to quash a subpoena if: (i) there is not adequate time to comply; (ii) it requires travel greater than 100 miles for trial or deposition; (iii) it seeks privileged or protected materials; or (iv) it subjects any person to undue burden. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3). The party seeking to quash the motion bears the burden of proving any one of these factors. Wiwa v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 392 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2004); Williams v. City of Dallas, 178 F.R.D. 103, 109 (N.D. Tex. 1998).
Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 17 authorizes a court to quash a subpoena for documents in a criminal case "if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive." Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c); United States v. Skilling, 2006 WL 1006622, at *1 (S.D. Tex. 2006). Although the Fifth Circuit has not established a test for determining whether a subpoena is unreasonable or oppressive, "the law presumes, however, that, 'absent a strong showing to the contrary, . . . a grand jury acts within the legitimate scope of its authority.'" In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 115 F.3d 1240, 1244 (5th Cir. 1997) (alteration in original) (citation omitted). Rule 17 does not address whether a subpoena for testimony may be quashed. Because it would preclude a grand jury from fully investigating sources related to its inquiry, the Fifth Circuit has been reluctant to grant motions to quash subpoenas for testimony, except where the grand jury has not acted in good faith. See In re Grand Jury Subpoenas, 2001 WL 940433, 29 Media L. Rep. 2301 (5th Cir. Aug. 17, 2001) (per curiam) (unpublished); see also United States v. Doe, 541 F.2d 490, 493 (5th Cir. 1976). Unless the grand jury is an "unreasonable, harassing, or oppressive instrument," it is acting in good faith. Id.
If a prompt motion is filed before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance, the court will quash or modify the subpoena if it finds the demands of the subpoena to be unreasonable or oppressive. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(1); Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c).
Alaska appellate courts have not had occasion to squarely address the existence or scope of a reporter's privilege. The same rules of criminal or civil procedure protecting third parties from frivolous, overly broad or unduly burdensome subpoenas in other contexts would apply to press subpoenas as well, and should be asserted along with the claim of a constitutional privilege as additional and alternate grounds for quashing a subpoena.
The rules for challenging a subpoena are the same regardless of the ground on which it is challenged, including the grounds that it is overbroad, unduly burdensome or frivolous. A motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum should be filed within ten (10) days after receiving the subpoena or at any time before the time stated for compliance if that time is fewer than ten days. Ark. R. Civ. P. 45(e). A motion to quash a subpoena to compel testimony also should be filed in a timely manner. The same applies whether the matter is a civil case or a criminal case.
To protect a reporter against a risk of inadvertent waiver of the reporter’s rights, California law requires specific notice to the reporter and to the news organization that employs or contracts with the reporter, including, “at a minimum, an explanation of why the requested records will be of material assistance to the party seeking them and why alternate sources of information are not sufficient to avoid the need for the subpoena.” Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1986.1(b).
In addition, “[i]f a trial court holds a journalist in contempt …, the court shall set forth findings, either in writing or on the record, stating at a minimum, why the information will be of material assistance to the party seeking the evidence, and why alternate sources of the information are not sufficient ….” Id. § 1986.1(c).
The civil and criminal rules permit a non-party to move to quash a subpoena that is frivolous or unduly burdensome. See Colo. R. Civ. P. 45; Colo. R. Crim. P. 17.
Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.280 and 1.410 govern objections to subpoenas in civil cases. These rules, in conjunction with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.361 and 3.220(h), should be used as the basis for objecting to subpoenas in criminal cases.
In response to a subpoena seeking testimony, Georgia allows the filing of a motion to quash. See generally O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-26(c). If a non-party receives a notice for the production of documents or a subpoena for the production of documents as part of discovery in a civil case, Georgia procedure permits an objection in lieu of filing a motion to quash. See generally O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-34(c)(1); 9-11-45(a)(2).
Hawai'i's rules of civil and criminal procedure do not specify the methods for contesting frivolous or unduly burdensome subpoenas. A motion to quash is the means for objecting to a subpoena for in person testimony. Written objections may be filed within 10 days (or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance if the time specified is less than 10 days) to a subpoena requesting inspection or copying of documents.
Idaho civil and criminal court rules contemplate the filing of a motion to quash or modify a subpoena contended to be unreasonable or oppressive.
The Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, 735 ILCS 5/1-101, et seq., contains the rules of procedure in civil cases. The Reporters Privilege Statute is set forth at 735 ILCS 5/8-901, et seq. The Illinois Code of Criminal Procedure, see 725 ILCS 5/100-1, et seq., contains the rules of procedure in criminal cases. The Illinois Supreme Court Rules and Local Rules of each Illinois Judicial District contain additional procedural rules.
Subpoenas that are oppressive or unduly burdensome may be quashed or modified. Ky. R. Civ. P. 45.02; Ky. R. Crim. P. 7.02(3).
Both Rule 45 of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules 17 and 17A of the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure permit protection from subpoenas that are overly broad, burdensome or oppressive.
A subpoena may be quashed for being "unreasonable or oppressive." Mass. R. Civ. P. 45; Mass. R. Crim. P. 17.
Issuance of a subpoena requires that the attorney sign the subpoena. MCR 2.506. Execution of a document by an attorney subjects the attorney to sanctions upon proof that the document was frivolous or interposed for improper purposes. MCR 2.114.
Miss. R. Civ. P. 45(f) provides that "upon a showing that the subpoena power is being exercised in bad faith or in such manner as unreasonably to annoy, embarrass, or oppress the party or the person upon whom the subpoena is served, the court in which the action is pending shall order that the subpoena be quashed and may enter such further orders as justice may require to curb abuses of the powers granted under this rule. To this end, the court may impose an appropriate sanction."
There is no statutory or case law addressing this issue. In general, all subpoenas are treated alike, with the exception of the notation above in CBS, 645 S.W.2d at 33, that there was no evidence that the grand jury actions constituted impermissible harassment.
All subpoenas should be contested before the court or body that issues them.
If a newsperson is forced to move to quash a subpoena and the courts finds there was no reasonable basis for requesting the information, it may award costs, including counsel fees, against the party seeking to enforce the subpoena. As a practical matter fees and costs are almost never awarded.
Rule 45 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure governs the procedure with respect to the issuance of subpoenas in both civil and criminal cases. See N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 15A-801 (subpoena for witness in criminal cases) & 15A-802 (subpoena for production of documentary evidence in criminal cases). Rule 45(c)(3) permits the filing of a motion to quash for a variety of reasons, including that the subpoena is "unreasonable or oppressive." This rule applies both to subpoenas duces tecum (i.e., subpoenas seeking the production of documents or things) and witness subpoenas.
Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure available at http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/civil/CivilProcedure.pdf
Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure available at http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/criminal/CriminalProcedure.pdf
The journalist’s privilege is equally applicable in civil or criminal proceedings, and we are not aware of any rules of procedure that alter that fact.
The rules of civil procedure specifically provide for the filing of a motion to quash or for a protective order. There is not equivalent provision in the criminal procedure rules, but such motions are accepted by the courts.
Subpoenas can be contested as unduly burdensome (regardless of whether issued to a journalist or not). Tex. R. Civ. P. 176.7. The shield law also requires that the subpoena not be unduly burdensome in most cases. The reporter’s privilege expressly provides for a court to consider whether the subpoena at issue is overbroad, unreasonable or oppressive, or being used to obtain peripheral, non-essential or speculative information. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§22.024(2) and (5) and Tex. Code. Crim. Proc. art. 38.11, §§5(b)(1) and 5(b)(4). This is not required to overcome the reporter’s privilege concerning criminal subpoenas seeking information concerning confidential sources. In a civil case, the subject of the subpoena should file a Motion for Protection or a Motion to Quash. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192. In a criminal case or a response to a grand jury subpoena, a Motion to Quash is the appropriate pleading to file. One basis for objecting to pre-trial subpoenas in a criminal case is that the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide pre-trial discovery. See Order Quashing Subpoena in State of Texas v. Coe, Cause No. 1227878 (Harris Cnty. Dist. Ct. June 15, 2010) (quashing subpoena issued by Coe on Non-Party Houston Community Newspapers).
A person who is subpoenaed to produce documents may serve a written objection on the attorney or party designated in the subpoena. Utah R. Civ. P. 45(e)(4)(e). In that case, the party that served the subpoena may not inspect the documents absent a court order obtained after the requesting party files a motion to compel production. Utah R. Civ. P. 45(e)(5). A person who is subpoenaed may file a motion to quash with the court from which a subpoena was issued if the person believes the subpoena is unreasonable or unduly burdensome, or the information sought is obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive. See Utah R. Crim. P. 14(b); Utah R. Civ. P. 45(e); Utah R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2) and 26(c).
No rules or reported cases.
A motion to quash should be directed to a frivolous subpoena, and either a motion to quash or modify the subpoena or a motion for a protective order should be directed to a burdensome one.
The civil and criminal rules of procedure do not differ significantly in this regard.
In a civil case, a subpoenaed party may make a motion to quash the subpoena pursuant to Rule 45 of the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure if the subpoena is frivolous or unduly burdensome. The subpoenaed party also may make a motion for a protective order pursuant to Rule 26.
In a criminal case, a subpoenaed party may make a motion to quash the subpoena pursuant to Rule 17(c) of the West Virginia Rules of Criminal Procedure if compliance with the subpoena would be unreasonable or oppressive. The subpoenaed party also may make a motion for a protective order pursuant to Rule 16(d).