Opinion ID: 757554
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Breadth of the Subpoena

Text: 38 Finally, PW-UK argues that the district court erred in deciding that the subpoena was not overbroad. Specifically, PW-UK contends that the court abused its discretion by ruling that [d]iscovery in any action in the wake of such extended and complicated misdoings will be commensurately extensive. Essentially, the subpoena requires Price Waterhouse to turn over those documents that relate to BCCI's acquisition or ownership interest in First American--the precise subject matter of the underlying litigation. Thus, the more PW-UK argues that the subpoena describes a great volume of its documents, the more PW-UK underlines the importance of its cache of documents to the discovery process. The costs of production may be great, but PW-UK either has not sought a protective order to shift that cost to First American, or PW-UK has not contested the denial of such an application on this appeal. This request may be burdensome, but PW-UK has not convinced the district court, or us, that the burden is undue.