Horan, David L., United States Magistrate Judge
In a motion to quash a third party insurance company subpoena, the district court
denied the request after finding that the subpoena was reasonable, it did not create an undue burden and that the requested information was relevant to the plaintiff's claims in the litigation.
Plaintiff served subpoenas on defendant's non party insurance company ("Insurer") seeking insurance policy records and communications. Defendant argued that any information sought by the subpoena would be inadmissible and irrelevant. Insurer also argued that complying with the subpoena would create an undue burden and that most, if not all, of the requested documents were more readily and conveniently available to defendant as a party to this case or already in the possession of the plaintiff.
In evaluating Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, the court found that the discovery sought from insurer was relevant to plaintiff's claims and proportional to the needs of the case. The court found that the subpoena did not subject Insurer to any undue burden. Defendant previously indicated that it already produced all of what it had in its possession and that plaintiff should ask Insurer for answers. As such, the court found that plaintiff should not be required to pursue the subpoenaed information from defendant before obtaining it from Insurer. Accordingly, the court denied the motion to quash but ordered that the subpoena be modified to limit the scope of discovery to only policies issued by Insurer or its predecessors to the defendant.
v.
CLARIANT CORPORATION and CLARIANT AG., Defendants.
CELANESE CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
CLARIANT CORPORATION and CLARIANT AG., Defendants.
HDI GLOBAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Movant
Counsel
Michael John Miguel, Brett Bissett, Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Lacy M. Lawrence, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Dallas, TX, Misty L. Pless, Thomas P. Ludwig, Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman LLP, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff.Bill E. Davidoff, Lance V. Clack, Figari + Davenport, LLP, Dallas, TX, for Defendants.