Kiss v. Torres

Background

Janet Kenny, a defendant, asked the court to quash—that is, cancel—a subpoena requiring her to appear for a deposition as a nonparty witness on August 30, 2024. Alternatively, she asked for a protective order staying, or delaying, the deposition until another court in the District of New York decided her pending motion to dismiss in a related action and until she could depose Daniel Kiss and obtain documents from him.

Kenny argued that it would be prejudicial for Kiss to question her about the incident before she received documentary discovery from him. She also argued that, if the other court denied her motion to dismiss, she would be able to serve Kiss with a deposition notice before he received that court’s decision.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 permits a party to subpoena a nonparty for a deposition, while requiring reasonable steps to avoid imposing an undue burden or expense. The rule also requires a court to quash or modify a subpoena that subjects the deponent to an undue burden. The party seeking to quash or modify the subpoena bears that burden.

The court also stated that district courts have broad authority to manage pretrial discovery and to stay proceedings when appropriate. A party seeking a stay must show the need for one.

The court found that Kenny had not met her burden. Her brief application did not clearly explain why the subpoena should be quashed or why the deposition should be stayed. She did not explain why she should be allowed to depose Kiss first or how she would be harmed by not receiving documents from him before her deposition. The court also noted that she had not claimed that the subpoena would impose an undue burden on her.

Disposition

Judge Kenneth M. Karas denied Kenny’s application to quash the deposition subpoena or, alternatively, to obtain a protective order staying the deposition. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion and mail a copy of the decision to Kiss.