SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread.
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (3775)5/3/2005 5:13:13 PM
From: SI Dave  Read Replies (2) of 5425
 
That's my take, too. If a party files to have a subpoena quashed and the court agrees, it effectively means that the attorney issuing the subpoena overstepped his authority as an officer of the court by issuing the subpoena in the first place.

I can't even count how many lawyers tried to subpoena records of my customers purchases (referring to my business before joining and unrelated to SI) for unrelated litigation discovery, only to be met with a flat "no" unless it was signed by a judge of proper jurisdiction. We never tried to quash it ourselves and we never complied with a subpoena in twenty years despite the various attorney's insistence that we had no choice. As far as I was concerned it was an abuse of the subpoena powers and they knew that a judge would agree.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News