Everything online journalists need to protect their legal rights. This free resource culls from all Reporters Committee resources and includes exclusive content on digital media law issues.
Federal courts within the Sixth Circuit have barred compelled disclosure of the identities of confidential sources of a nonprofit organization's newsletter, a freelance author, and a newspaper's advertising dept. Southwell v. Southern Poverty Law Ctr, 949 F. Supp. 1303 (W.D. Mich. 1996); Schultz v. Reader's Digest Ass'n, 468 F. Supp. 551 (E.D. Mich. 1979); NLRB v. Midland Daily News, 151 F.3d 472 (6th Cir. 1998).
A motion to quash a subpoena issued under the authority of a federal court should show the name of the court to which the motion is directed, the name of the case, the case no. assigned to the case, and a title for the motion. For example:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Parson Brown, Plaintiff,
v.
Barn Door Co., Defendant.
Case No. CV 007 Motion of nonparty Paul Utzer to quash subpoena
The court is required by the Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(1) in civil proceedings to determine whether the party issuing a subpoena is imposing an undue burden or expense on the person or entity subject to the subpoena. Similarly, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) allows the court in a criminal proceeding to quash a subpoena duces tecum that it determines to be unreasonable or oppressive.
Where information requested in a subpoena is unduly burdensome, disclosure of the information may be denied. In re Daimler Chrysler, 216 F.R.D. 395 (E.D. Mich. 2003).
Where the accuracy of the substance of a publication is at issue, an affidavit attesting to its accuracy is not admissible as evidence. However, as a practical matter, the attorney issuing the subpoena often will accept an affidavit rather than engage in a protracted legal battle over an asserted First Amendment privilege or some other form of litigated resistance.
Briefs & Comments,
