Legal Opinion

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Duces Tecum Served Upon PHE, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Kentucky

Decided May 21, 1992PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SIMPSON, District Judge.

This matter stands submitted on PHE, Inc.’s motion to quash a grand jury subpoena issued to it on November 12, 1991, 1 by a federal grand jury sitting in the Western District of Kentucky.

I

PHE has filed both a motion and a supplemental motion to quash a grand jury subpoena duces tecum. In its initial motion to quash, PHE makes two separate arguments. PHE contends that the subpoena is overbroad, unreasonable, oppressive, and seeks information irrelevant to any legitimate investigation in this district. PHE also moves to quash on the ground that subpoena…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama Ex Rel. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  2. New Jersey v. T. L. O.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. United States v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pinter v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
  2. In re August, 1993 Regular Grand JuryDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 1993
  3. Bean LLC v. John Doe BankCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
  4. Bean LLC v. John Doe BankDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API