Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 7, 2023

Weng v. Kung Fu Little Steamed Buns Ramen, Inc.

Judge
Loretta Preska
Docket
1:17-cv-00273
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Weng v. Kung Fu Little Steamed Buns Ramen, Judge Preska denied defense counsel’s motion to quash post-judgment subpoenas.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs may obtain the requested post-judgment payment information, and defense counsel must produce it by September 21, 2023.

What happened

In Weng v. Kung Fu Little Steamed Buns Ramen, the plaintiffs served subpoenas seeking information about payments received from or on behalf of Zhe Song, also known as Peter Song, since January 13, 2017.

Defense counsel asked the court to quash the subpoenas. The court explained that post-judgment discovery may be used to help collect a judgment and that client identities and fee information generally are not protected by attorney-client privilege.

Judge Preska denied the motion to quash and ordered defense counsel to produce the requested information by September 21, 2023. The Clerk was directed to close the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Weng v. Kung Fu Little Steamed Buns Ramen, Inc. · No. 1:17-cv-00273
Judge
Loretta Preska
Date
Sept. 7, 2023

Background

The court reviewed the parties’ letters concerning defense counsel’s motion to quash subpoenas served by the plaintiffs. The subpoenas sought documents and communications concerning payments received from or on behalf of Zhe Song, also known as Peter Song, since January 13, 2017. The requests included wire transfers, direct deposits, other money transfers, and information about the sending accounts, including banks, account numbers, and SWIFT codes.

Legal standard

The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 permits a judgment creditor to obtain discovery from any person, including the judgment debtor, when the discovery will assist with collecting a judgment. The court also cited New York law concerning information subpoenas used to obtain information relevant to a judgment debtor’s satisfaction of a judgment.

The court held that client identities and information about fees paid or retainer agreements are not protected by attorney-client privilege absent special circumstances. It concluded that this was the type of information sought by the plaintiffs’ subpoenas.

Ruling

Judge Preska denied defense counsel’s motion to quash, identified as docket entry 165. The court ordered defense counsel to produce the requested information immediately and no later than September 21, 2023. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.