689:
embarrassment likely to result from the disclosure of information contained in such records. In some states, records can be disclosed at the discretion of the state director of welfare. In general, welfare records are not public records, and should not be considered to be such. Disclosure of information is usually limited to purposes directly connected with the administration of welfare benefits. The investigation of costs of welfare programs have been held to be sufficiently related to the matters in question to justify disclosure. Statutes designed to limit welfare record availability are generally held by the courts to be not immune from the power of subpoena duces tecum. Certain state laws limit the availability of information that can be obtained from the subpoena of such documents. These are always subject to a court challenge, on a case-by-case basis. Welfare recipients are generally allowed access to their files, by subpoena duces tecum. Death of a welfare recipient is considered in some states to be sufficient reason to remove the reason for confidentiality. Some states have passed so-called "Right to Know" statutes, which would make welfare recipients and the information available to the public. These, along with common law, and state and federal constitutions guaranteeing freedom of the press do not give newspapers (or other news media) the right to access the names of persons on welfare, or the amounts they receive.
577:, the policy of the courts is in favor of full disclosure. It is the intent of the rules of procedure that pre-trial discovery take place without any intervention of a judge. So-called "fishing expeditions" (massive and aimless calls for all documents related to the litigation) are permissible under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 (b) (1). This rule is repeated in many states' rules of procedure: "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant ... if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." The looseness of the definition of relevant evidence is generally construed to mean "liberal" production. The physician who is the party to an action does not own the records of patients he has treated. They are not privileged if the patient has waived confidentiality. Physicians must produce medical records under
868:, the California Supreme Court remanded a case to the trial court for action in tort against a treating physician for failure to report suspected child abuse. The theory at trial was that the plaintiff, a child of about 12 months of age, had been returned to a home where further physical abuse occurred, causing more damages. This was because the physician had failed to report the abuse in violation of California law. After this case, all states instituted mandatory reporting by physicians and other medical personnel of any suspected child abuse or neglect cases. In general, reporting in good faith shields the physician or health care worker from tort liability. Reporting to police or social services necessitates obtaining medical records by subpoena duces tecum. This case, and legislation that followed it were in response to several articles that appeared in the medical literature that defined
490:, the US Supreme Court wrote: "If the orders be regarded merely as directions in the administration of judicial affairs in respect of the immediate possession of property or custody of prisoners, we cannot be properly called to, by reason of anything appearing on these records, in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in this manner, to direct them to be set aside. And if the proceedings should be treated as involving a final determination as on issues joined to the right to such possession and custody, there was no complaint of want of notice or of hearing, and the summary made adopted did not in itself affect the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court upon the ground that it had exceeded its powers."
680:. A foreign agent may not claim Fifth Amendment provisions against self-incrimination. Nor can records be withheld from subpoena duces tecum on the grounds that production of such documents would incriminate officers or other members of the foreign corporation. However, there is case authority in which foreign corporations have been protected from illegal searches and seizures, including documents and books. The matter of a foreign corporation operating as a "person" within the United States being afforded protection under the Fourteenth Amendment is discussed.
554:
product", meaning written documents or computer records generated in preparation for a trial or hearing. This includes information such as potential questions that may be asked of witnesses, lists of possible witnesses, memoranda, notes, trial strategies, written briefs, or documents that may, or may not end up being used in the course of litigation. Usually, none of this can be the subject of a subpoena duces tecum. If a communication between lawyer and client is made in the presence of the third party, the privilege is not recognized to exist.
779:, a Supreme Court decision from 1971. The court directed that medical reports put forth by a treating physician in Social Security hearings should be accepted as evidence, despite the hearsay nature of the medical records. These should be accepted, even if cross-examination is not available. The claimant has the right to subpoena the treating physician. In cases of conflicting medical evidence, it is not unconstitutional for the hearing officer to obtain independent medical advice to help resolve the physical questions involved. Under the
427:(a rescheduling of a court hearing at a later date) of a civil action may be granted due to the absence of documents or papers. The party failing to produce the documents requested by a subpoena duces tecum must show good reason why there was a failure to do so. Acceptable explanations have included loss or destruction of papers, or an agreement to use copies. The party seeking the continuance must show that the absence of the documents is not because of the negligence of their own, or of the attorney of record.
532:
a demonstration of actual damages incurred from the absence of testimony. Most courts have rejected the arguments for seeking damages in this kind of case. Giving false testimony in a judicial proceeding even though the allegation is made that the person giving the testimony knew it to be false, does not give rise, either at common law or by statute, to a civil action for damages resulting from such testimony. The situation is probably different if intentionally false documents are submitted under a
25:
635:
framed in presumption of public access to the proceedings and records. United States Code 11, Section 107 (a), of the federal bankruptcy law, is a codification of the common-law general right to inspect judicial records and documents. However, the right is not absolute and may be denied when the entity seeking to view the records has an improper purpose. The general intent of the statute is to favor public access to court documents.
88:
958:(HCQIA) of 1986 granted doctors sitting on peer review committees immunity from subpoena duces tecum, or liability for the revocation of hospital privileges of other doctors. The matters of peer review cannot, in the normal course of events, be the subject of a subpoena duces tecum. This has led to claims that powerful doctors can abuse the process to punish other doctors for reasons unrelated to medical issues (termed "
732:
This allows participation for good cause, either by counsel (lawyer) or in person. You cannot intervene in an FTC hearing, except by demonstrating that substantial issues of law or fact would not be properly raised and argued—and that these issues are important and immediate enough to warrant additional expenditure of FTC resources. This involvement can be enhanced by subpoena duces tecum.
946:
ordinance or regulation. Some of these may be limited to wounds typically inflicted by gun or knife. There may be similar reporting requirements in cases of domestic violence. These statutes have been generally upheld to constitutional challenges. Reporting of such cases usually voids any challenge to subpoena duces tecum of the medical records by police or state authorities.
399:. The method of using a subpoena duces tecum is generally valid only to compel a witness to produce documents and other things at the time of the deposition. If a deponent is a non-party to the action (not involved directly in the litigation, but wanted for testimony), production of documents can be compelled only through a proper subpoena duces tecum.
899:, which defined abuse as "physical or mental injury, negligent treatment, or maltreatment of a child under the age of 18 by a person who is responsible for the child's welfare under circumstances which would indicate that the child's health or welfare is harmed or threatened thereby". The legislation created the
926:) defined "child abuse and neglect" as "physical or mental injury, sexual abuse, negligent treatment, or maltreatment of a child under the age of eighteen by a person responsible for the child's welfare under circumstances which indicate that the child's health or welfare is harmed or threatened thereby."
794:
rules. Although the Jencks Act applies only to government agents or employees who testify in criminal cases, making these witnesses and relevant documents available for cross-examination after testimony, it has been applied in administrative law cases in the interests of justice and fair play. The
731:
If the FTC institutes an adjudicative proceeding (a hearing), the person who originated the matter by complaining to the FTC is not a party to the action and does not have any control over it. The FTC may allow the complaining person to participate in the proceeding by virtue of 15 USC, section 45.
723:
from proceeding in an investigation. It cannot stay (stop) a subpoena duces tecum to produce documents in the investigative stage. An injunction by a federal court does not have the power to restrain the FTC from enforcing an order requiring corporations to furnish reports and documents un 15 USC §
614:
Judgment creditors (those who have received a favorable court ruling for monetary damages) are permitted to ask questions about a debtor's residence; recent employment history; business relationships, including partners, co-shareholders, co-officers, co-directors; the contents of a will; transfers of
531:
There are certain conditions precedent, or defenses, to a recovery of damages for a person's failure to testify, or to provide documents pertinent to a hearing or trial. There must be a breach of testimonial duty, after having been properly served with a legitimately executed subpoena. There must be
849:
Medical records introduced as evidence are crucial in determining both causation and impairment in worker's compensation cases. In cases where the evidence is contested, medical evidence in the form of records, opinions, affidavits and testimony concerning both fact and opinion is necessary. When
527:
At common law, and under various statutes pertaining to a given jurisdiction, a right to action for damages, or for a statutory penalty or forfeiture, exists against a witness who, without sufficient excuse, fails or refuses to give oral testimony or to produce documents or other specified items in
651:
has powers to compel production of documents from a non-debtor corporation or person concerning transactions involving the debtor corporation or person. Production of documents can be challenged as being burdensome. Assets diverted to outside corporations or bank accounts/stock portfolios and such
634:
The right of the public to access judicial records is fundamental to a democratic state and is analogous to the United States' First
Amendment right of freedom of speech and of the press and the Sixth Amendment right to public trials. While the right to access trial records is not absolute, it is
564:
is usually statutorily defined, and can vary from state to state. The usual rule is that medical records are immune from subpoena if the plaintiff has not alleged physical or mental injuries or damages. Once the plaintiff alleges physical or mental injuries proximately flowing from a potentially
840:
actions for recovery of damages, it is necessary for the introduction of medical records to establish a basis for the claimed loss. An injured plaintiff is entitled to recover the expenses necessary to cure or treat injuries. Courts frequently call upon expert testimony to interpret and advise,
430:
Similarly, a continuance may be granted in a criminal case if there is good reason documents pertinent to the case could not be produced at the time of trial. For example, a continuance should be granted for failure to produce a transcript of testimony given at a previous trial. In general, it is
553:
is generally recognized by the courts. Communications between lawyer and client are generally immune from subpoena. In other words, a lawyer cannot be compelled to testify in a trial unless the lawyer becomes, or appears to become, a party to the litigation. A similar situation exists with "work
445:
the United States
Supreme Court ruled that a defendant must have access to government witnesses who will testify against him in a criminal trial, and must also have access to any documents pertaining to that testimony. This includes papers, documents, written statements and the like. This led to
493:
Mandamus is the remedy where a lower court has clearly failed to issue compulsion to produce documents, or to allow the petitioner access to such documents as may be in the possession of the court or the parties to the action. Mandamus can be used to compel a court to enforce an order to answer
965:
The
American Medical Association conducted a probe of the sham peer review issue and found that no pervasive problem exists. Allegations of sham peer review are easy to make (for example, by doctors whose medical mistakes have made them targets of peer review), but actual infractions are rare.
598:
In some states (such as
California), rape crisis counselors and domestic violence advocates hold a statutory privilege analogous to therapist–client privilege. (See, for example, 1035 Cal. Evidence Code for rape crisis advocates, and 1037.6 Cal. Evidence Code for domestic violence advocates).
454:
of relevant government documents, but only after a government agent or employee has testified at trial. There can be no pre-trial discovery. The subpoena is allowed by the trial judge. The government has the right to deny access to the documents. This may be due to the sensitive nature of the
945:
Physician-patient privilege is defined and limited by statute. Many jurisdictions have mandatory reporting laws requiring treating physicians or other medical personnel to report any suspicious injury to police or other appropriate authorities. These requirements may be imposed by statute,
402:
Federal cases and some states follow Rule 27(a)(3) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning the production of documents in pretrial discovery, including those pertaining to depositions. These can include the subpoena duces tecum to produce documents, or in some cases to undergo a
819:
Medical records form the core of any medical malpractice case. Actions for malpractice are controlled by the general rules of evidence in civil procedure. A malpractice action necessarily involves the question of requisite care and skill applied in a medical case. With the exception of
688:
Statutes governing the disclosure of information contained in welfare records exist in many jurisdictions. The rationale for the existence of these regulations is to encourage full and frank disclosure by the welfare recipient of his situation and the protection of the recipient from the
705:, a complaint stating its charges in that regard. The notice shall also give a date for a hearing in the matter. Delivery of the subpoena duces tecum for production of documents may be done in person, or by certified letter. Receipt of the letter is considered proof of service.
672:. It is not necessary to treat a corporation as a person in all circumstances. United States case law is confusing concerning this matter when dealing with foreign corporations, and their operation within the United States. Especially troubling have been rulings concerning the
505:
Mandamus is the proper remedy to compel the quashing of a subpoena duces tecum for the production before a grand jury of documents protected by attorney–client privilege. Presumably, this would apply to attorney work product, although there is no case law on the matter.
652:
other assets as land holdings lie within the power to compel production under subpoena duces tecum. Federal law recognizes no accountant-client privilege. A subpoena duce tecum served pursuant to
Bankruptcy Rule 2004 is not a violation of accountant-client privilege. 11
485:
in
Alabama issued a writ directing the previous attorney to relinquish the documents. He, in turn, sought relief from the Supreme Court, which denied his application, saying it would not interfere with the properly conducted internal matters of a court. In the case
827:
Admission of "learned treatises" (published books and medical articles) at trial varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Some require that the expert admit it is an authoritative reference. Others will allow admission of learned treatises by judicial notice.
395:) may be accompanied by a request for production of documents and other tangible things during the taking of a deposition. The notice to produce (literally: "bring these documents with you to the deposition") is served prior to the deposition. This follows the
811:
In a case of alleged negligence by a physician, written summaries of the case by physicians provided to the insurance carrier or other parties can be the subject of a subpoena duces tecum, if, in the opinion of the court, they are relevant to the
431:
reversible error to proceed with a criminal trial in the absence of a previous trial transcript, when such contains pertinent information that should have been considered in the new trial. In these cases, a continuance is the usual remedy.
557:
The federal courts will apply the common law rule of attorney–client privilege unless there is an intervening state law applying to the central issues of the matter. In those cases, the federal court uses the effective state law.
887:
Amendments require each state to make child welfare services available throughout the state to all children and provide coordination between child welfare services (Title IV-B) and social services provided under the
615:
property; and the identity of persons who either owed a debt to the judgment debtor, or received things of value from the debtor. Information in bank accounts can also be the subject of a subpoena duces tecum.
850:
oral testimony is taken from physicians, the usual standard is to state an opinion "within a reasonable degree of medical certainty". Worker's compensation laws are dictated by state statute or
415:, interpreting Rule 27 literally, it has been held that a party can simply produce the documents only, and in certain cases, avoid an oral deposition when presented with a subpoena duces tecum.
725:
481:
In an 1893 case, the United States
Attorney for Alabama refused to vacate his office, refusing to surrender books, papers and other materials to the newly appointed US Attorney. The
934:
474:(Latin for "we command") is appropriate to compel surrender of documents in the possession of attorneys or other persons that have been illegally obtained under the abuse of a
607:
Discovery can be authorized for the production of documents for both pre-trial and post-trial actions. Most states either follow, or have modeled their procedures after, the
322:. The summons is called a "subpoena for production of evidence" in some U.S. states that have sought to reduce the use of non-English words and phrases in court terminology.
954:
The issue of removal of a doctor from a hospital staff, or revoking or limiting a license to practice medicine usually involve various state and federal immunities. The
966:
Opponents of peer review counter that the sparcity of successful challenges is indicative of how widespread the problem is and how difficult these actions are to win.
1011:
669:
618:
In federal court proceedings concerning judgment debtors, the inquiry is usually limited to the discovery of assets. In international cases, being tried in
2099:
Caffey, "Some
Traumatic Lesions in Growing Bones Other Than Fractures and Dislocation – Clinical and Radiological Features", 30 Br. J. Radiol. 225, 1957
1016:
854:. In many states, the employer has the right to demand an independent examination and can also direct treatment be carried out by certain physicians.
673:
588:, since these have statutory immunity. The theory is that the frankness of peer review would be chilled if these records could be routinely compelled.
109:
102:
1006:
677:
35:
514:
A witness who has refused to obey a lawful order to produce books, documents and papers may be incarcerated for contempt of court. A writ of
701:(FTC) has reason to believe that any person has violated 15 USC section 13, 14, 18 or 19, it must issue and serve on that person and on the
976:
780:
520:
will not apply unless it can be shown the witness could not have legally had possession of such documents. In such a situation the writ of
462:
and dismissal of criminal charges. An accused criminal has no right to subpoena the work product of the prosecution in a criminal case.
900:
824:
cases, medical opinion about the care is essential. This involves the necessity to obtain a subpoena duces tecum for medical records.
2367:
1411:
339:
instructs the witness to bring in hand books, papers, or evidence for the court. In most jurisdictions, a subpoena usually has to be
1423:
892:
Act (ADC, later known as AFDC; now called Title XX) Determinations in these cases frequently require production of medical records.
930:
907:
896:
152:
2096:
Caffey, "Multiple
Fractures in the Long Bones of Infants Suffering from Chronic Subdural Hematoma", 56 Am. J. Roentgen 163 (1946)
889:
841:
after examining medical records concerning the nature of injuries, future medical, disability and other issues before the court.
124:
795:
party of record must make an official request to the hearing officer to have Jencks rules followed. Some agency rules, such as
643:
An entity (person or a corporation) may be compelled to produce documentary evidence in accordance with the subpoena powers of
660:
and dockets of the Bankruptcy Courts are public records and are to be open to examination at reasonable times without charge.
702:
772:
Disabled persons under the age of 65 years can be eligible for disability benefits under Social Security Titles II and XVI.
131:
2313:
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court of County of Norfolk, 457 US 596, 73 L ED 2nd 248, 102 S. Ct. 2613, 8 Media LR 1689
955:
919:
911:
138:
584:
Peer review records, and other hospital documents of quality control committee meetings are generally not subject to
262:
171:
69:
1001:
608:
396:
2114:
Stein, J., "Damages and Recovery, Personal Injury and Death Actions", Lawyers Cooperative, Bancroft Whitney, 1972
1031:
986:
884:
851:
657:
644:
561:
120:
2340:
Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California, 478 US 1, 92 L Ed 2nd 1, 106 S. Ct. 2735, 13 Media LR 1001
2108:
Pegalis, S. and Wachsman, H., "American Law of Medical Malpractice", Lawyers Cooperative, Bancroft Whitney, 1980
937:
of 1995 These laws have made child abuse a federal crime, and routinely mandate production of medical records.
2295:
Barsky v. Board of Regents, Supreme Court of the United States, 1954, 347, US 442, 74 S. Ct. 650, 98 L. Ed. 829
796:
648:
755:
Matters subject to official notice that may be resolved by further production of documents related to the case
2325:
Klinge v. Lutheran Charites Ass'n, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, 1975, 523 F. 2nd 56
981:
759:
In general, pre-hearing conferences are not public. The FTC is not restricted by a rigid rule of evidence.
550:
2349:
Smith v. Superior Court of San Joaquin County, 189 Cal.App.2d 6; 1 Cal Reporter reprinted in 88 ALR 2nd 650
619:
299:. In some jurisdictions, it can also be issued by legislative bodies such as county boards of supervisors.
482:
933:
of 1988 when enacted, expanded the definition of abuse. Sexual crimes were specifically identified in
565:
tortious act by the defendant, or in some other disability hearing, medical records can be subject to
1041:
728:
by the Attorney General of the United States, or under 15 USC § 50 to enforce fines and forfeitures.
408:
331:
47:
1076:
895:
In 1972, Congressional hearings began on child abuse and neglect. In response, Congress passed the
720:
698:
623:
51:
2102:
Kempe, "The Battered Child Syndrome", Journal of the American Medical Syndrome", 181, July 7, 1962
145:
2068:"Inappropriate Peer Review. Report of the Board of Trustees of the American Medical Association."
1036:
870:
709:
592:
574:
441:
335:, which is a writ summoning a witness to testify orally. However, unlike the latter summons, the
98:
2301:
Colorado State Board of Medical Examiners v. District Court, 191 Colo. –, 551, P. 2nd 194 (1976)
498:(questions submitted by the court or one of the parties to be answered under oath and pain of
43:
2292:
Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers Inc., (Fla) 531 So 2nd 113, 13 FLW 497, 15 Media LR 1901
776:
2310:
Fairbank v. hardin (CA 9) 429, F2d 264, cert edn 400 US 943, 27 L Ed 2nd 247, 91 S. Ct. 244
2067:
996:
949:
876:
545:
404:
2304:
Continental Oil Co. v. United States (Ca 9 Ariz) 330 F 2nd 347 reprinted in 9 ALR 3rd 1413
287:
ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible
8:
1366:
Federal Rules of Civil or Criminal Procedure, Rule 501 in the Federal Rules of Evidence
1099:
653:
475:
340:
2334:
Oxnard Publishing Co. v. Superior Court of Ventura County (Cal App) 68 Cal Reporter 83
864:
821:
752:
Expediting discovery and presentation of evidence, including restriction of witnesses
1875:
Malone, Plant and Little, "Worker's Compensation and Employment Rights", pp. 288–291
668:
A domestic corporation may be considered to be a "person" within the meaning of the
391:
In the United States, a notice to a party deponent (a person called to testify in a
2105:
Malone, Plant and Little, "Worker's Compensation and Employment Rights", West, 1980
1091:
991:
959:
392:
359:
expression meaning literally "under penalty , you will bring with you." The word
193:
1231:
For mandamus as it generally applies to witnesses, see: 41 ALR 433 and 112 ALR 438
923:
915:
2343:
Re Iowa Freedom of Information Council (CA Iowa) 724 F 2nd 658, 10 Media LR 1120;
1026:
1021:
570:
495:
1434:
General case law is reviewed in 30 Am Jur 2nd "Executions, Etc.", §§ 720 and 714
2362:
2331:
Matchett v. Superior Court, 40 Cal. App. 3rd, 623, 115 Cal. Reporter 317 (1974)
816:'s case. Claims that these statements are "work product" will generally fail.
459:
2356:
1077:"Discovery of Documents and Things: The Federal Rules and the California Law"
516:
412:
307:
292:
1497:
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court of County of Norfolk; US Supreme Court
787:
in the form of medical records are admissible up to the point of relevancy.
724:
49. The only relief available to stop a demand for documents is to seek an
746:
315:
302:
The summons is known by various names in different jurisdictions. The term
2319:
International Harvester Co. v. Eaton Circuit Judge, 163 Mich 5, 127 NW 695
713:
424:
2328:
Landeros v. Flood 17 Cal. 3rd 399, 131, Cal. Reporter, 69, 551 P.2nd 389
2298:
Butler v. Doyle, Supreme Court of Arizona, 112 Ariz. 522, 544 P. 2nd 204
950:
Peer review records in medical licensing and hospital credential actions
692:
663:
1103:
800:
791:
591:
Several United States Federal Circuit Courts have recognized a limited
447:
311:
1506:
Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of California; US Supreme Court
1285:
Cases listed and discussed in 81 ALR 3rd 1297, §§ 3 (b), 8 (a), 9 (a)
813:
2316:
In Re Parsons, 150 US 150, 37, 1, L Ed 1034, 14 US Supreme Court, 50
1488:
Oxnard Publishing Co.v. Superior Court of Ventura County, California
1095:
87:
2166:
70 A Am Jur 2nd "Social Security and Medicare", sections 468 et seq
2111:
Sharpe, D., Fiscina, S. and Head, M., "Law and Medicine" West, 1978
1641:
70 A Am Jur 2nd "Social Security and Medicare", sections 468 et seq
528:
obedience to the command of a properly issued and served subpoena.
471:
288:
1931:
1929:
629:
784:
524:
will properly apply, and is the remedy for such improper action.
499:
284:
2160:
54 Am Jur 2nd "Monopolies", sections 394, 398–399, 836, 840, 862
749:, admissions of fact, and contents and authenticity of documents
1926:
602:
319:
2148:
31 A Am Jur 2nd "Expert and Opinion Evidence" sections 127–277
2136:
21 A Am Jur 2nd "Criminal Law", section 666 et seq; 876 et seq
1470:
21 A Am Jur 2nd 'Criminal Law" sections 666 et seq; 876 et seq
656:
section 107 (a) provides that papers filed in cases under the
245:
231:
208:
940:
478:. Mandamus can vacate an order to produce books and papers.
356:
296:
225:
34:
deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
2163:
61 Am Jur 2nd "Physicians, Surgeons, Etc." sections 200–377
1195:
International Harvester Co. v. Eaton Circuit Judge, Michigan
735:
Pre-hearing conferences are the norm. These are useful in:
2139:
23 Am Jur 2nd "Depositions and Discovery", sections 126–127
2124:
2 Am Jur 2nd "Administrative Law", section 328 (Jencks Act)
1731:"Pegalis and Wachsman "American Law of Medical Malpractice"
1065:
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 30(b)(5), also called FRCP
837:
509:
251:
214:
199:
2257:
85 ALR 3rd 1196 (mandatory reporting of suspicious wounds)
2178:
82 Am Jur 2nd "Worker's Compensation", sections 504 et seq
719:
A Federal District Court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin the
222:
1866:
31 A Am Jur 2nd "Expert and Opinion Evidence", §§ 129–277
1213:
Smith v. Superior Court of San Joaquin County, California
450:, 18 USC, Part II, Chapter 223, § 3500, which allows for
2145:
30 Am Jur 2nd "Executions, Etc.", sections 720, 714, 722
638:
573:
by asking the judge to protect them from questioning or
1713:
61 Am Jur 2nd "Physicians, Surgeons, Etc.", §§ 200–377
1012:
Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution
670:
Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution
857:
693:
Federal Trade Commission hearings in monopoly actions
664:
Compelling a foreign corporation to produce documents
263:
248:
234:
228:
219:
211:
196:
1902:
82 Am Jur 2nd "Workers' Compensation", §§ 504 et seq
242:
205:
1857:
Pegalis and Wachsman, "American Law of Malpractice"
1123:
23 Am Jur 2nd Depositions and Discovery, §§ 126–127
254:
239:
202:
2151:36 Am Jur 2nd "Foreign Corporations" sections 4–45
1569:36 Am Jur 2nd "Foreign Corporations", §§ 44 and 45
1402:Sharpe Fiscina and Head, "Law and Medicine" p. 69
1384:Sharpe, Fascina and Head, "Law and Medicine", p. 5
1017:Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution
674:Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution
2175:81 Am Jur 2nd "Witnesses", section 79, 172 et seq
2130:16 A Am Jur 2nd "Constitutional Law", section 738
1919:
1917:
1007:Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
678:Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
386:
2354:
1177:23 Am Jur 2nd "Depositions and Discovery", § 444
1159:23 Am Jur 2nd "Depositions and Discovery", § 443
844:
683:
2346:Rosenthal v. Dickerman, 98 Mich 208, 57, NW 112
2142:29 A Am Jur 2nd "Evidence", sections 1416–1420
2127:9 Am Jur 2nd "Bankruptcy", section 829, 828–829
2025:
831:
630:Public access to documents filed with the court
418:
1914:
1668:2 Am Jur 2nd "Administrative Law", section 329
806:
762:
2282:6 Proof of Facts 2nd 345 et seq (child abuse)
2279:3 Proof of Facts 2nd 265 et seq (child abuse)
2276:2 Proof of Facts 2nd 365 et seq (child abuse)
1911:17 Cal 3d, 399, 131 Cal rptr 69, 551 P2d, 389
1650:Richardson v. Perales, US Supreme Court, 1971
1479:Re: Iowa Freedom of Information Council, Iowa
1452:Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Florida
1258:52 Am Jur 2nd "Mandamus", § 367, Grand Juries
1240:Continental Oil Co. v. United States, Arizona
32:The examples and perspective in this article
2133:17 Am Jur 2nd "Continuance", sections 20, 81
1848:Sharpe, Fiscina and Head, "Law and Medicine"
977:Administrative Procedure Act (United States)
603:Pre- and post-judgment execution proceedings
2322:Jencks v. United States, 355, US 657 (1957)
2157:52 Am Jur 2nd "Mandamus", section 314, 367
1722:Sharpe Fiscina and Head, "Law and Medicine"
1533:9 Am Jur 2nd "Bankruptcy", sections 828–829
1150:Jencks v. United States, 355, US 657 (1957)
775:The seminal case in Social Security law is
647:45 as applied by Bankruptcy Rule 9016. The
455:documents, or because they are classified.
378:
372:
366:
360:
2254:81 ALR 3rd 1297 section 3 (b), 8 (a), 9(a)
2040:16 A Am Jur 2nd "Constitutional Law" § 738
1970:
1968:
941:Mandatory reporting of wounds and injuries
901:National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect
2337:Perales v. Richardson 91 A SCR 1420, 1971
2154:39 Am Jur 2nd "Habeas Corpus", section 97
2118:
1695:61 Am Jur 2nd "Physicians, Surgeons, Etc"
1677:Am. Jur. 2nd, "Administrative Law", § 329
377:"you will lead, guide, pull, bring"; and
172:Learn how and when to remove this message
70:Learn how and when to remove this message
2239:21 ALR 3rd 912 (workers' comp discovery)
931:Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
908:Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
897:Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
862:In the landmark 1976 California case of
708:Power to issue subpoenas is extended to
510:Commitment of witness; contempt of court
2307:Ex Parte Clarke, 126 Cal, 235, 58 P 546
2182:
2169:75 AM Jur 2nd "Trial", sections 205–216
1965:
1893:Malone, Platt and Little, p. 879 et seq
890:Aid to Families with Dependent Children
2355:
1605:54 Am Jur 2nd "Monopolies", §§ 398–399
1393:Matchett v. Superior Court, California
1321:81 Am Jur 2nd Witnesses, §§ 172 et seq
790:Several federal agencies have adopted
108:Please improve this article by adding
1074:
767:
703:Attorney General of the United States
639:Production of documents in bankruptcy
569:. While witnesses may try to resist
2286:
2061:
81:
18:
2172:79 Am Jur 2nd "Welfare", section 50
1740:Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 803
1704:29A Am Jur 2nd "Evidence", §§ 29–30
1276:39 Am Jur 2nd "Habeas Corpus", § 97
465:
458:If a remedy is granted, there is a
434:
281:subpoena for production of evidence
13:
2260:97 ALR 3rd 324 (Landeros v. Flood)
2194:64 ALR Fed 971 (learned treatises)
2022:6 Proof of Facts 2nd p. 345 et seq
1758:Am Jur 2nd "Evidence" § 1416, 1417
1515:75 Am Jur 2nd "Trials", §§ 205–216
956:Healthcare Quality Improvement Act
858:Mandatory reporting of child abuse
14:
2379:
2270:
1839:Stein, J., "Damages and Recovery"
1614:54 Am Jur 2nd "Monopolies", § 862
1596:54 Am Jur 2nd "Monopolies", § 394
1141:17 Am Jur 2nd "Continuance", § 81
903:as an information clearinghouse.
2368:Legal documents with Latin names
2052:
2043:
2034:
2016:
2004:
1767:Fed Rules of Evidence § 195, 258
1524:9 Am Jur 2nd "Bankruptcy", § 829
1443:20 Am Jur 2nd "Executions, Etc."
1186:Rosenthal v. Dickerman, Michigan
1132:17 Am Jur 2nd "Continuance",§ 20
1002:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
739:Clarifying or simplifying issues
726:action of compliance in mandamus
609:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
397:Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
192:
86:
23:
2001:2 Proof of Facts 2nd 365 et seq
1995:
1986:
1977:
1974:3 Proof of Facts, p. 265 et seq
1956:
1947:
1938:
1935:Sharpe, Fiscina and Head, p. 48
1905:
1896:
1887:
1878:
1869:
1860:
1851:
1842:
1833:
1824:
1815:
1806:
1797:
1788:
1779:
1770:
1761:
1752:
1743:
1734:
1725:
1716:
1707:
1698:
1689:
1680:
1671:
1662:
1659:Fairback v. Hardin, 9th Circuit
1653:
1644:
1635:
1626:
1617:
1608:
1599:
1590:
1581:
1572:
1563:
1554:
1545:
1536:
1527:
1518:
1509:
1500:
1491:
1482:
1473:
1464:
1455:
1446:
1437:
1428:
1417:
1405:
1396:
1387:
1378:
1369:
1360:
1351:
1342:
1333:
1324:
1315:
1306:
1303:81 Am Jur 2nd "Witnesses", § 79
1297:
1288:
1279:
1270:
1261:
1252:
1243:
1234:
1225:
1216:
1207:
1198:
1189:
1180:
987:Bankruptcy in the United States
935:Sex Crimes Against Children Act
852:Federal Employers Liability Act
716:cases of unlawful acquisition.
645:Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
626:is utilized where appropriate.
16:Court order to produce evidence
1587:79 Am Jur 2nd, "Welfare", § 50
1204:52 Am Jur 2nd "Mandamus" § 314
1171:
1162:
1153:
1144:
1135:
1126:
1117:
1068:
1059:
797:National Labor Relations Board
649:United States Bankruptcy Court
387:Order pursuant to a deposition
1:
1944:See: Caffey, Kempe references
1168:Jencks v. United States idem.
1048:
845:Worker's Compensation actions
684:Subpoena of welfare documents
539:
110:secondary or tertiary sources
1461:75 Am Jur 2nd "Trial" § 205
832:Experts and opinion evidence
781:Administrative Procedure Act
620:United States Federal Courts
419:Failure to produce documents
346:
7:
1424:CA Codes (evid:1037-1037.8)
1412:CA Codes (evid:1035-1036.2)
1267:Ex Parte Clarke, California
1032:Physician–patient privilege
969:
807:Medical malpractice actions
763:Subpoena of medical records
562:Physician–patient privilege
46:, discuss the issue on the
10:
2384:
2075:
1542:See case law: 120 ALR 1103
712:cases of price-fixing and
543:
1294:Generally 61 ALR 3rd 1297
1075:Edgar, Donald L. (1954).
1042:Subpoena ad testificandum
982:Attorney–client privilege
622:, the application of the
551:Attorney–client privilege
332:subpoena ad testificandum
1686:Butler v. Doyle, Arizona
1053:
721:Federal Trade Commission
699:Federal Trade Commission
624:Hague Service Convention
2084:Federal Rule 27 (a) (3)
2081:11 USCS section 107 (a)
871:battered child syndrome
575:inspection of documents
442:Jencks v. United States
190:(pronounced in English
2209:112 ALR 438 (mandamus)
2119:American jurisprudence
379:
373:
367:
361:
314:jurisdictions such as
121:"Subpoena duces tecum"
97:relies excessively on
2200:41 ALR 433 (mandamus)
1084:California Law Review
799:automatically follow
777:Richardson v. Perales
353:sub poena duces tecum
2183:American law reports
1632:55 Am Jur 2nd, § 840
1623:55 Am Jur 2nd, § 836
1578:54 ALR 3rd 768, § 24
1414:retrieved 2009-11-26
1037:Reporter's privilege
997:Documentary evidence
877:child abuse syndrome
593:reporter's privilege
586:subpoena duces tecum
579:subpoena duces tecum
567:subpoena duces tecum
546:Privilege (evidence)
534:subpoena duces tecum
452:subpoena duces tecum
337:subpoena duces tecum
327:subpoena duces tecum
304:subpoena duces tecum
187:subpoena duces tecum
52:create a new article
44:improve this article
1983:Pub. L. No. 100-294
710:Robinson–Patman Act
1992:Pub. L. No. 104-71
1962:Pub. L. No. 93-247
1953:Pub. L. No. 87-543
768:Administrative law
742:Amending pleadings
654:United States Code
476:writ of attachment
409:mental examination
365:means "under" and
329:is similar to the
2287:Case law citation
2011:Landeros v. Flood
865:Landeros v. Flood
822:res ipsa loquitur
439:In the 1957 case
310:, and some other
182:
181:
174:
156:
80:
79:
72:
54:, as appropriate.
2375:
2070:
2065:
2059:
2056:
2050:
2047:
2041:
2038:
2032:
2029:
2023:
2020:
2014:
2013:: 97 ALR 3rd 324
2008:
2002:
1999:
1993:
1990:
1984:
1981:
1975:
1972:
1963:
1960:
1954:
1951:
1945:
1942:
1936:
1933:
1924:
1921:
1912:
1909:
1903:
1900:
1894:
1891:
1885:
1882:
1876:
1873:
1867:
1864:
1858:
1855:
1849:
1846:
1840:
1837:
1831:
1828:
1822:
1819:
1813:
1810:
1804:
1801:
1795:
1792:
1786:
1783:
1777:
1774:
1768:
1765:
1759:
1756:
1750:
1747:
1741:
1738:
1732:
1729:
1723:
1720:
1714:
1711:
1705:
1702:
1696:
1693:
1687:
1684:
1678:
1675:
1669:
1666:
1660:
1657:
1651:
1648:
1642:
1639:
1633:
1630:
1624:
1621:
1615:
1612:
1606:
1603:
1597:
1594:
1588:
1585:
1579:
1576:
1570:
1567:
1561:
1558:
1552:
1549:
1543:
1540:
1534:
1531:
1525:
1522:
1516:
1513:
1507:
1504:
1498:
1495:
1489:
1486:
1480:
1477:
1471:
1468:
1462:
1459:
1453:
1450:
1444:
1441:
1435:
1432:
1426:
1421:
1415:
1409:
1403:
1400:
1394:
1391:
1385:
1382:
1376:
1373:
1367:
1364:
1358:
1355:
1349:
1346:
1340:
1337:
1331:
1328:
1322:
1319:
1313:
1310:
1304:
1301:
1295:
1292:
1286:
1283:
1277:
1274:
1268:
1265:
1259:
1256:
1250:
1247:
1241:
1238:
1232:
1229:
1223:
1220:
1214:
1211:
1205:
1202:
1196:
1193:
1187:
1184:
1178:
1175:
1169:
1166:
1160:
1157:
1151:
1148:
1142:
1139:
1133:
1130:
1124:
1121:
1115:
1114:
1112:
1110:
1081:
1072:
1066:
1063:
992:Deposition (law)
960:sham peer review
466:Writ of mandamus
435:Jencks Act cases
382:
376:
370:
364:
275:
271:
267:
261:
260:
257:
256:
253:
250:
247:
244:
241:
237:
236:
233:
230:
227:
224:
221:
217:
216:
213:
210:
207:
204:
201:
198:
177:
170:
166:
163:
157:
155:
114:
90:
82:
75:
68:
64:
61:
55:
27:
26:
19:
2383:
2382:
2378:
2377:
2376:
2374:
2373:
2372:
2353:
2352:
2289:
2273:
2251:61 ALR 3rd 1297
2245:55 ALR 3rd 1322
2227:90 ALR 2nd 1323
2185:
2121:
2087:FRCP 30 (b) (5)
2078:
2073:
2066:
2062:
2058:85 ALR 3rd 1196
2057:
2053:
2048:
2044:
2039:
2035:
2030:
2026:
2021:
2017:
2009:
2005:
2000:
1996:
1991:
1987:
1982:
1978:
1973:
1966:
1961:
1957:
1952:
1948:
1943:
1939:
1934:
1927:
1922:
1915:
1910:
1906:
1901:
1897:
1892:
1888:
1883:
1879:
1874:
1870:
1865:
1861:
1856:
1852:
1847:
1843:
1838:
1834:
1829:
1825:
1821:90 ALR 2nd 1323
1820:
1816:
1811:
1807:
1802:
1798:
1793:
1789:
1784:
1780:
1775:
1771:
1766:
1762:
1757:
1753:
1748:
1744:
1739:
1735:
1730:
1726:
1721:
1717:
1712:
1708:
1703:
1699:
1694:
1690:
1685:
1681:
1676:
1672:
1667:
1663:
1658:
1654:
1649:
1645:
1640:
1636:
1631:
1627:
1622:
1618:
1613:
1609:
1604:
1600:
1595:
1591:
1586:
1582:
1577:
1573:
1568:
1564:
1559:
1555:
1550:
1546:
1541:
1537:
1532:
1528:
1523:
1519:
1514:
1510:
1505:
1501:
1496:
1492:
1487:
1483:
1478:
1474:
1469:
1465:
1460:
1456:
1451:
1447:
1442:
1438:
1433:
1429:
1422:
1418:
1410:
1406:
1401:
1397:
1392:
1388:
1383:
1379:
1374:
1370:
1365:
1361:
1356:
1352:
1348:55 ALR 3rd 1322
1347:
1343:
1338:
1334:
1329:
1325:
1320:
1316:
1311:
1307:
1302:
1298:
1293:
1289:
1284:
1280:
1275:
1271:
1266:
1262:
1257:
1253:
1248:
1244:
1239:
1235:
1230:
1226:
1221:
1217:
1212:
1208:
1203:
1199:
1194:
1190:
1185:
1181:
1176:
1172:
1167:
1163:
1158:
1154:
1149:
1145:
1140:
1136:
1131:
1127:
1122:
1118:
1108:
1106:
1096:10.2307/3477713
1079:
1073:
1069:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1051:
1046:
1027:Legal discovery
1022:Interrogatories
972:
952:
943:
885:Social Security
860:
847:
834:
809:
770:
765:
695:
686:
666:
658:Bankruptcy Code
641:
632:
605:
571:legal discovery
548:
542:
512:
496:interrogatories
468:
446:passage of the
437:
421:
389:
349:
306:is used in the
273:
269:
265:
238:
218:
195:
191:
178:
167:
161:
158:
115:
113:
107:
103:primary sources
91:
76:
65:
59:
56:
41:
28:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
2381:
2371:
2370:
2365:
2351:
2350:
2347:
2344:
2341:
2338:
2335:
2332:
2329:
2326:
2323:
2320:
2317:
2314:
2311:
2308:
2305:
2302:
2299:
2296:
2293:
2288:
2285:
2284:
2283:
2280:
2277:
2272:
2271:Proof of facts
2269:
2268:
2267:
2266:22 ALR 4th 774
2264:
2263:1 ALR 4th 1124
2261:
2258:
2255:
2252:
2249:
2248:59 ALR 3rd 441
2246:
2243:
2240:
2237:
2236:14 ALR 3rd 594
2234:
2233:9 ALR 3rd 1413
2231:
2228:
2225:
2224:88 ALR 2nd 650
2222:
2221:76 ALR 2nd 946
2219:
2216:
2213:
2210:
2207:
2204:
2201:
2198:
2195:
2192:
2191:49 ALR Fed 674
2189:
2188:48 ALR Fed 259
2184:
2181:
2180:
2179:
2176:
2173:
2170:
2167:
2164:
2161:
2158:
2155:
2152:
2149:
2146:
2143:
2140:
2137:
2134:
2131:
2128:
2125:
2120:
2117:
2116:
2115:
2112:
2109:
2106:
2103:
2100:
2097:
2094:
2091:
2088:
2085:
2082:
2077:
2074:
2072:
2071:
2060:
2051:
2049:49 ALR Fed 674
2042:
2033:
2031:22 ALR 4th 774
2024:
2015:
2003:
1994:
1985:
1976:
1964:
1955:
1946:
1937:
1925:
1923:97 ALR 3rd 324
1913:
1904:
1895:
1886:
1884:21 ALR 3rd 912
1877:
1868:
1859:
1850:
1841:
1832:
1830:76 ALR 2nd 946
1823:
1814:
1805:
1796:
1787:
1778:
1769:
1760:
1751:
1749:64 ALR Fed 971
1742:
1733:
1724:
1715:
1706:
1697:
1688:
1679:
1670:
1661:
1652:
1643:
1634:
1625:
1616:
1607:
1598:
1589:
1580:
1571:
1562:
1553:
1544:
1535:
1526:
1517:
1508:
1499:
1490:
1481:
1472:
1463:
1454:
1445:
1436:
1427:
1416:
1404:
1395:
1386:
1377:
1375:48 ALR Fed 259
1368:
1359:
1350:
1341:
1339:59 ALR 3rd 441
1332:
1330:1 ALR 4th 1124
1323:
1314:
1312:14 ALR 3rd 594
1305:
1296:
1287:
1278:
1269:
1260:
1251:
1249:9 ALR 3rd 1413
1242:
1233:
1224:
1222:88 ALR 2nd 650
1215:
1206:
1197:
1188:
1179:
1170:
1161:
1152:
1143:
1134:
1125:
1116:
1090:(5): 829–837.
1067:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1050:
1047:
1045:
1044:
1039:
1034:
1029:
1024:
1019:
1014:
1009:
1004:
999:
994:
989:
984:
979:
973:
971:
968:
951:
948:
942:
939:
920:42 U.S.C.
912:42 U.S.C.
859:
856:
846:
843:
833:
830:
808:
805:
803:requirements.
769:
766:
764:
761:
757:
756:
753:
750:
743:
740:
694:
691:
685:
682:
665:
662:
640:
637:
631:
628:
604:
601:
544:Main article:
541:
538:
511:
508:
488:In re: Parsons
467:
464:
436:
433:
420:
417:
388:
385:
348:
345:
180:
179:
94:
92:
85:
78:
77:
38:of the subject
36:worldwide view
31:
29:
22:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2380:
2369:
2366:
2364:
2361:
2360:
2358:
2348:
2345:
2342:
2339:
2336:
2333:
2330:
2327:
2324:
2321:
2318:
2315:
2312:
2309:
2306:
2303:
2300:
2297:
2294:
2291:
2290:
2281:
2278:
2275:
2274:
2265:
2262:
2259:
2256:
2253:
2250:
2247:
2244:
2242:44 ALR 3rd 24
2241:
2238:
2235:
2232:
2230:2 ALR 3rd 286
2229:
2226:
2223:
2220:
2217:
2214:
2211:
2208:
2205:
2202:
2199:
2196:
2193:
2190:
2187:
2186:
2177:
2174:
2171:
2168:
2165:
2162:
2159:
2156:
2153:
2150:
2147:
2144:
2141:
2138:
2135:
2132:
2129:
2126:
2123:
2122:
2113:
2110:
2107:
2104:
2101:
2098:
2095:
2092:
2089:
2086:
2083:
2080:
2079:
2069:
2064:
2055:
2046:
2037:
2028:
2019:
2012:
2007:
1998:
1989:
1980:
1971:
1969:
1959:
1950:
1941:
1932:
1930:
1920:
1918:
1908:
1899:
1890:
1881:
1872:
1863:
1854:
1845:
1836:
1827:
1818:
1812:2 ALR 3rd 286
1809:
1800:
1791:
1782:
1773:
1764:
1755:
1746:
1737:
1728:
1719:
1710:
1701:
1692:
1683:
1674:
1665:
1656:
1647:
1638:
1629:
1620:
1611:
1602:
1593:
1584:
1575:
1566:
1557:
1548:
1539:
1530:
1521:
1512:
1503:
1494:
1485:
1476:
1467:
1458:
1449:
1440:
1431:
1425:
1420:
1413:
1408:
1399:
1390:
1381:
1372:
1363:
1357:44 ALR 3rd 24
1354:
1345:
1336:
1327:
1318:
1309:
1300:
1291:
1282:
1273:
1264:
1255:
1246:
1237:
1228:
1219:
1210:
1201:
1192:
1183:
1174:
1165:
1156:
1147:
1138:
1129:
1120:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1078:
1071:
1062:
1058:
1043:
1040:
1038:
1035:
1033:
1030:
1028:
1025:
1023:
1020:
1018:
1015:
1013:
1010:
1008:
1005:
1003:
1000:
998:
995:
993:
990:
988:
985:
983:
980:
978:
975:
974:
967:
963:
961:
957:
947:
938:
936:
932:
927:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
904:
902:
898:
893:
891:
886:
881:
879:
878:
873:
872:
867:
866:
855:
853:
842:
839:
829:
825:
823:
817:
815:
804:
802:
798:
793:
788:
786:
782:
778:
773:
760:
754:
751:
748:
744:
741:
738:
737:
736:
733:
729:
727:
722:
717:
715:
711:
706:
704:
700:
697:Whenever the
690:
681:
679:
675:
671:
661:
659:
655:
650:
646:
636:
627:
625:
621:
616:
612:
610:
600:
596:
594:
589:
587:
582:
580:
576:
572:
568:
563:
559:
555:
552:
547:
537:
535:
529:
525:
523:
522:habeas corpus
519:
518:
517:habeas corpus
507:
503:
501:
497:
491:
489:
484:
483:federal court
479:
477:
473:
463:
461:
456:
453:
449:
444:
443:
432:
428:
426:
416:
414:
413:Ninth Circuit
410:
406:
400:
398:
394:
384:
381:
375:
369:
363:
358:
354:
344:
342:
338:
334:
333:
328:
323:
321:
317:
313:
309:
308:United States
305:
300:
298:
294:
291:for use at a
290:
286:
285:court summons
282:
278:
277:
259:
189:
188:
176:
173:
165:
154:
151:
147:
144:
140:
137:
133:
130:
126:
123: –
122:
118:
117:Find sources:
111:
105:
104:
100:
95:This article
93:
89:
84:
83:
74:
71:
63:
53:
49:
45:
39:
37:
30:
21:
20:
2212:120 ALR 1103
2063:
2054:
2045:
2036:
2027:
2018:
2010:
2006:
1997:
1988:
1979:
1958:
1949:
1940:
1907:
1898:
1889:
1880:
1871:
1862:
1853:
1844:
1835:
1826:
1817:
1808:
1799:
1790:
1781:
1772:
1763:
1754:
1745:
1736:
1727:
1718:
1709:
1700:
1691:
1682:
1673:
1664:
1655:
1646:
1637:
1628:
1619:
1610:
1601:
1592:
1583:
1574:
1565:
1556:
1547:
1538:
1529:
1520:
1511:
1502:
1493:
1484:
1475:
1466:
1457:
1448:
1439:
1430:
1419:
1407:
1398:
1389:
1380:
1371:
1362:
1353:
1344:
1335:
1326:
1317:
1308:
1299:
1290:
1281:
1272:
1263:
1254:
1245:
1236:
1227:
1218:
1209:
1200:
1191:
1182:
1173:
1164:
1155:
1146:
1137:
1128:
1119:
1107:. Retrieved
1087:
1083:
1070:
1061:
964:
953:
944:
928:
905:
894:
882:
875:
869:
863:
861:
848:
835:
826:
818:
810:
789:
774:
771:
758:
747:stipulations
734:
730:
718:
707:
696:
687:
667:
642:
633:
617:
613:
611:Rule 69(a).
606:
597:
590:
585:
583:
578:
566:
560:
556:
549:
533:
530:
526:
521:
515:
513:
504:
492:
487:
480:
469:
457:
451:
440:
438:
429:
422:
401:
390:
383:"with you".
352:
350:
343:personally.
336:
330:
326:
324:
316:South Africa
303:
301:
280:
186:
185:
183:
168:
159:
149:
142:
135:
128:
116:
96:
66:
57:
33:
2218:151 ALR 475
2215:128 ALR 682
2206:77 ALR 1490
2197:10 ALR 1152
2093:FRCP 69 (a)
1803:10 ALR 1152
1794:151 ALR 475
1785:66 ALR 1186
1776:128 ALR 682
1560:77 ALR 1490
924:§ 5106
916:§ 5101
714:Clayton Act
425:continuance
371:"penalty";
351:The phrase
2357:Categories
2203:49 ALR 732
1551:49 ALR 732
1109:21 January
1049:References
801:Jencks Act
792:Jencks Act
540:Privileges
470:A writ of
448:Jencks Act
393:deposition
312:common law
132:newspapers
99:references
910:of 1974 (
883:The 1962
814:plaintiff
745:Entering
411:. In the
347:Etymology
162:June 2023
48:talk page
970:See also
472:mandamus
460:mistrial
405:physical
289:evidence
60:May 2023
42:You may
2090:FRCP 34
2076:Sources
1104:3477713
785:hearsay
500:perjury
293:hearing
283:, is a
146:scholar
1102:
922:
914:
341:served
320:Canada
279:), or
272:-seez
148:
141:
134:
127:
119:
2363:Writs
1100:JSTOR
1080:(PDF)
1054:Notes
380:tecum
374:duces
368:poena
357:Latin
355:is a
297:trial
153:JSTOR
139:books
50:, or
1111:2020
962:").
929:The
906:The
874:and
838:tort
676:and
325:The
318:and
276:-kəm
268:-nə
125:news
1092:doi
836:In
502:).
407:or
362:sub
295:or
274:TEE
270:DEW
266:PEE
264:sə-
101:to
2359::
1967:^
1928:^
1916:^
1098:.
1088:42
1086:.
1082:.
918:–
880:.
783:,
595:.
581:.
536:.
423:A
246:iː
232:iː
226:uː
223:dj
209:iː
184:A
112:.
1113:.
1094::
258:/
255:m
252:ə
249:k
243:t
240:ˈ
235:z
229:s
220:ˌ
215:ə
212:n
206:p
203:ˈ
200:ə
197:s
194:/
175:)
169:(
164:)
160:(
150:·
143:·
136:·
129:·
106:.
73:)
67:(
62:)
58:(
40:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
