Legal Opinion

United States v. Rajaratnam

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided February 15, 2011No. 2:09 CR 1184(RJH)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

RICHARD J. HOLWELL, District Judge:

Before the Court is a motion by third party Richard Choo-Beng Lee (“Lee”) to quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon him by defendant Raj Rajaratnam pursuant to Rule 17 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Lee argues that several of the requests in the subpoena are overbroad and/or call for certain tax rec ords that are protected from disclosure pursuant to privileges under state law. For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.

LEGAL STANDARD

A subpoena issued pursuant to Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Jaffee v. RedmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Dirks v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Bowman Dairy Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  5. St. Regis Paper Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. FernandesDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2015
  2. United States v. NixDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2017
  3. United States v. WeyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
  4. United States v. NosalDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API