Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order both denied because defendants did not have standing to quash subpoenas issued to their banks.
File:
Judge:
Date:
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Published:
No
Index Heading:
Discovery
Affirmed:
Motion to Quash and Motion for Protective Order both denied because defendants did not have standing to quash subpoenas issued to their banks.
Links
[1] https://www.ncmb.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/Rule%2045%20motion%20to%20quash_subpoena%20duces%20tecum_Northen%20v%20Windson%20Investments_SIGNED%20OPINION.pdf
[2] https://www.ncmb.uscourts.gov/content/catharine-r-aron