Northen v. Windsor Investments of North Carolina, LLC, et al. (Case No. 14-02023)

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version

Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order both denied because defendants did not have standing to quash subpoenas issued to their banks. 

File: 
PDF icon Rule 45 motion to quash_subpoena duces tecum_Northen v Windson Investments_SIGNED OPINION.pdf
Judge: 
Catharine R. Aron
Date: 
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Meta Data: 
subpoena, quash, bank records, Rule 45
Published: 
No
Index Heading: 
Discovery
Affirmed: