2. Filing an objection or a notice of intent

If the subpoena duces tecum seeks only the production of records (e.g., outtakes, reporter's notes, unpublished negatives), you may serve a set of written objections, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B), and thereby force the subpoenaing party to file a motion to compel. Written objections may also be served in response to a subpoena demanding both production of records and appearance for testimony. This mechanism postpones bringing the matter to the Court's attention and places the onus on the party serving the subpoena to go forward.

Rule 45 requires that a non-party objecting to a subpoena for documents give notice in writing to the subpoenaing party within 14 days of receipt of the subpoena. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B). If the non-party objects to a subpoena on the grounds that the material requested is privileged, it must expressly state this in the objection and include a description of the privileged documents, which could be used by the subpoenaing party to contest the privilege. Once the non-party objects to a subpoena, the subpoenaed materials may only be obtained through a court order to compel production. Id. Although some non-parties choose to file a motion to quash, Rule 45 places no obligation on the non-party to do so.  In the absence of a motion to quash, it is incumbent on the subpoenaing party to move to enforce the subpoena.

Although the subpoena was issued to a trade name used by a television duopoly, and not either of the existing legal entities, the parent company of the duopoly waived an objection on that basis by responding to the subpoena.  Castleberry v. Camden County, 331 F.R.D. 559 (M.D. Ga. 2019).

In civil cases, Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B) states that once an individual is served with a subpoena seeking documents, he has fourteen days after service (or until the time specified for compliance, if such time is less than fourteen days after service of the subpoena) to serve a written objection on the opposing party. Pursuant to Rule 45(e)(2), if a reporter is withholding information under the claim that the information is privileged, the claim must be made expressly, and must be supported by a description of the nature of the information withheld. This written objection prevents the subpoenaing party from gaining access to the requested information except by court order. The serving party may respond to a written objection by moving for an order to compel the production of the information, upon notice to the subpoenaed individual.

No notice of intent is required prior to filing a motion to quash. Failure to timely object is usually considered a waiver of any objection to the subpoena. United States v. IBM Corp., 70 F.R.D. 700, 701-02 (S.D.N.Y. 1976); Eldaghar v. City of New York,2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19247, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2003).

To the extent that a subpoena issued in the name of a federal court in a civil action seeks only the production of documents, tapes or similar materials, the recipient may, at his or her option, serve upon the attorney who issued the subpoena a written objection to the subpoena. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B). The objection need not be filed with the court. After service of the objection, the person who received the subpoena need not respond to it unless and until the party that issued the subpoena obtains an order from the court compelling disclosure, and the party is required to give the recipient of the subpoena notice of any motion to compel. Id. In the absence of service of an objection, the recipient of such a subpoena must either timely comply, or timely file a motion with the court to quash or modify the subpoena, as discussed below.

Where a subpoena for documents, tapes or similar materials is issued in the name of a federal court in a criminal action, the recipient must either comply, or "promptly" file a motion with the court to quash or modify the subpoena. Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c).

A federal court’s subpoena for deposition testimony is not subject to an objection letter; instead, if the recipient wishes to challenge it, the recipient must file a motion to quash.

The case law of the Fourth Circuit indicates that a notice of intent need not be filed before a motion to quash.  If the subpoena seeks documents or tangible things, or to permit inspection, then a party may serve (not file) a written objection on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d)(2)(B).  If the objection is served, then the party serving the subpoena may file a motion to compel production.  Neither the Federal Rules nor the local rules in courts in the Fourth Circuit permit a party subpoenaed for testimony to serve an objection to avoid appearing to testify.  In such instances, the party must file a motion to quash.

Regardless of whether a party intends to file a motion to quash, it should notify the subpoenaing party within 14 days of receipt of the subpoena if it objects to producing the subpoenaed materials so as to shift to the other party the burden of seeking an order to compel. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B). Whether a party must file a notice of intent to quash before filing a motion to quash will be a matter of the local rules for the federal district court in which the motion to quash will be filed.

Where a subpoena commands a person to produce documents for inspection or copying, that person may object to it. The objection must be in writing, and delivered to the person or attorney designated in the subpoena as being responsible for serving it. The objection must be made within 14 days after receiving the subpoena. However, if the subpoena gives fewer than 14 days for compliance, then at any time before the time set by the subpoena for compliance. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(2)(B).

If the objection is made in writing, delivered to the appropriate person, and delivered on time, then the person on whose behalf the subpoena was issued and served has no right to inspect or copy the subpoenaed documents without a court order. The person responsible for issuing and serving the subpoena may file a motion with the court to compel compliance with the subpoena, or the person receiving the subpoena may move to quash or modify it.

We would recommend filing a notice of intent and appropriate notice of motion. Courts have disapproved any attempt to quash a subpoena ex parte.  Reinders Brothers, Inc. v. Rain Bird Eastern Sales Corp., 627 F.2d 44, 51-52 (7th Cir. 1980). As reporters will often be non-parties, they should seek leave to file before actually filing their motion to quash. Some local rules require a non-party to seek leave from the court before filing a motion. Northern District of Illinois Local Rules 5.3 and 5.6.

No Eighth circuit appellate case law addresses this issue in the context of the reporter's privilege.

The district court in Continental Cablevision held that "a reporter must, in addition to claiming the privilege in response to specific requests or questions, provide a court with particularized allegations or facts that support his/her claim of privilege." Continental Cablevision, Inc. v. Storer Broad. Co., 583 F. Supp. 427, 436 (E.D. Mo. 1984). "Only if a reporter provides such information can a court determine whether the reporter is properly invoking the privilege and whether the balance should be struck in favor on non-disclosure."  Id.

The district court in Hively held, "Movants must provide the court with particularized allegations or facts to support a privilege claim." United States v. Hively, 202 F. Supp. 2d 886, 889 (E.D. Ark. 2002). (The Hively court did not look favorably on the reporter's refusal to show up in court to claim the privilege.)

The objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.

There are two different courses that a reporter may take to attempt to avoid producing documents or other materials requested by subpoena without having to file a motion to quash. The course that the reporter should take depends upon whether only the notice of intent to serve a subpoena for production or inspection has been served or whether the subpoena has actually issued. If the subpoena has not issued, any person or party may serve an objection to the issuance of subpoena within ten (10) days of service of the notice of intent to serve a subpoena for production or inspection. If the objection is filed within this ten- (10-) day period, the subpoena will not issue, and the party seeking the information must move for an order to compel pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. ALA. R. CIV. P. 45 (a)(3)(B). If the subpoena has issued and the subpoenaed party wishes to object under a claim of privilege, the subpoenaed party must assert the privilege expressly in an objection and serve the objection upon the subpoenaing party or the attorney designated in the subpoena. The objection should be served before the time specified for compliance in the subpoena. ALA. R. CIV. P. 45 (c)(2)(B) & (d)(2). Once the objection has been made, the subpoenaing party is not entitled to inspect and copy the requested materials until the court has issued an order to that effect. To receive such an order, the subpoenaing party may move for an order to compel. Id.

There is no legal requirement in Alaska that a notice of intent to quash be filed before filing a motion to quash, nor is there any practice of doing so, nor are there other procedural steps required or recommended prior to moving to quash.

Ariz. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(5)(A)(ii) states that, if a subpoenaed party intends to object to the production, such objection must be “served on the party or attorney serving the subpoena before the time specified for compliance or within 14 days after the subpoena is served, whichever is earlier.” If such an objection is made, the objecting person “need not comply with those parts of the subpoena that are the subject of the objection, unless ordered to do so by the issuing court.”  See Ariz. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(5)(B)(i).  The party issuing the subpoena may then move under Rule 37(a) for compliance with the subpoena. An objection under this Rule need not be filed; service is sufficient.

If served with a subpoena duces tecum to produce documents or materials at a deposition, a witness may file a written objection to the inspection or copying of such documents. If an objection is made, the party issuing the subpoena may not inspect or copy the materials except upon a court order. If the party issuing the subpoena does move for such an order, that party must give notice to the objecting deponent. Ark. R. Civ. P. 45(e).

California law allows a non-party to serve written objections to a subpoena under limited circumstances. E.g., Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1985.3(g) (subpoena duces tecum for consumer’s personal records); id. § 1985.6(f) (subpoena duces tecum for employment records). In addition, California law provides that privileges may be preserved by a timely objection during the deposition. See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.460. However, one California court took these provisions a step further, and held that serving objections to a “records only” subpoena sufficed to preserve the deponent’s objections to the subpoena and placed the onus on the subpoenaing party to move to compel. See Monarch Healthcare v. Superior Court, 78 Cal. App. 4th 1282, 1290, 93 Cal. Rptr. 2d 619 (2000). Although this case arose in the context of a “records only” subpoena, its reasoning also may apply to subpoenas seeking testimony.

There is no requirement of a notice being filed prior to filing the actual motion. The rule states that, a subpoena duces tecum can be quashed "upon motion made promptly."

There is no provision in the Colorado Rules similar to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(2)(B), which states that any written notification is sufficient to stay the discovery until a court resolves the matter.

The law does not require filing either an objection or a notice of intent, except for an objection to production of things under General Statutes § 52-148e(c) supra.

Rule 45 suggests that when objecting to a subpoena to command appearance at a hearing or trial or deposition, the recipient should move to quash.  Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(3).  However, the rules provide that when challenging a subpoena to provide records or permit inspection, a written objection supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced may be served.  Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B).  Such a written objection must be served before the earlier of the time specified in the subpoena for compliance or 14 days from the date of service of the subpoena.

Rule 17 similarly authorizes motions to quash in the criminal context, Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c)(2), but on its face it allows for a recipient to “otherwise object” only where a subpoena “require[s] the production of personal or confidential information about a victim,” Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c)(3).

For subpoenas regarding inspection and copying of documents, the objecting party must serve its objection upon the issuing party or attorney designated in the subpoena within 14 days of service. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 45 (c)(2)(B). The objection must include sufficient detail to enable the opposing party to contest the claim. Id. The party issuing the subpoena must then move for an order to compel production. Id.

The criminal subpoena provisions suggest that a party seeking to object to the subpoena should move to quash.  SCR-Crim. 17(c)(2) (“On motion made promptly, the court may quash or modify the subpoena if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”).

 

The civil subpoena provisions suggest that when objecting to a subpoena to command appearance at a hearing or trial or deposition, the objecting party should move to quash.  SCR-Civ. 45(c)(3).  However, if objecting to a subpoena to provide records or information, a written objection may suffice when supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced.  SCR-Civ. 45(c)(2)(B) & (d)(2).  The written objection must be served within 14 days of the service of the subpoena, or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance if less than 14 days.  SCR-Civ. 45(c)(2)(B).

A notice of intent is not required prior to filing a motion to quash. Service of an objection, as opposed to a motion to quash, is sufficient to stay the production of documents in response to a deposition subpoena duces tecum. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.410(e).

A non-party can serve an objection in lieu of filing a motion to quash if the non-party receives a notice or a subpoena to produce documents in connection with discovery in a civil case.

Pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-34(c)(1), where a party issues a notice to produce documents to a non-party as part of discovery in a civil case, the non-party may serve an objection to the notice, and the party will thereafter have to move to compel and make a showing of good cause to obtain the discovery. The objection must be served within thirty days after the service of the notice.

Pursuant to O.C.G.A § 9-11-45(a)(2), where a party issues a subpoena to produce documents to a non-party as part of discovery in a civil case, the non-party may serve an objection to the subpoena, and the party will thereafter have to move to compel to obtain the discovery. The objection must be served “within ten days after the service [of the subpoena] or on or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance if such time is less than ten days after service.”

Georgia practice does not require the filing of a notice of intent. A motion to quash, however, must be accompanied by citations of supporting authorities and, where allegations of unstipulated fact are relied upon, supporting affidavits, or citations to evidentiary materials of record. Rule 6.1 of the Uniform Rules of Superior Court.

A notice of intent or an objection need not be filed before a motion to quash is filed, however, under HRCP 45(d)(1), the party served with a subpoena may, within 10 days of service, make written objection to inspection or copying of any documents.

There is no requirement that an “objection” or “notice of intent” be filed.

There is no Illinois statutory or case law addressing this issue.

Indiana courts do not require that a notice of intent to quash be filed before the motion to quash. A motion to quash must be made “promptly,” Ind. Tr. Rule P. 45(B), and in any event within the time specified for compliance with the subpoena, unless it is a subpoena duces tecum to a nonparty, see Ind. Tr. Rule P. 34(C)(3). To be safe, any motion to quash should be filed within three days of receipt. However, if the subpoena calls for the production of tapes or documents, and if the entity subpoenaed is a non-party, then the provisions of Ind. R. Trial P. 34(C) apply, and the subpoenaed nonparty has thirty days to make a written response and assert a request for security or to offer different terms of compliance.

A motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum in a grand jury proceeding must include a statement of facts and grounds in support of the objection to the subpoena. Ind. Code § 35-34-2-6(a). The court must conduct a hearing on the motion to quash. Id. Also, Ind. Tr. Rule P. 34(C) applies. See Cooper v. State, 714 N.E.2d 689, 690 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (holding that the trial rules apply to criminal proceedings so long as they do not conflict with special criminal rules).

Within 14 days of service of a subpoena to permit inspection and copying of documents, the person subpoenaed may serve a written objection. Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1701(4)(b). If objection is made the subpoenaing party is not entitled to an inspection and copying of the documents unless that party first seeks a court order to compel production. Id.

State courts do not require the filing of a notice of intent to quash a subpoena before the filing of the actual motion to quash. Objections and/or the motion to quash should be filed within at least 14 days of service. The filing of objections, as opposed to a motion to quash, will be sufficient and, indeed, is probably preferable in cases in which only documents are sought. If objections are made, the burden is on the party issuing the subpoena to demonstrate that he or she is entitled to documentary material in issue. See K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 60-245a(b). The burden of proof is allocated differently in connection with a motion to quash, in which the burden is typically allocated to the party seeking an order quashing the subpoena to demonstrate that he or she is entitled to that relief.  (Note: litigants intending to file a subpoena for the business records of a non-party are required to give the parties notice of their intent to do so at least 14 days prior to the issuance of the subpoena; however, the statute does not provide for notice to the non-party the subpoena will target. See K.S.A. 60-245a(b)(1).)

Kentucky does not require that the party seeking to quash the subpoena file a notice of intent to do so before filing the motion to quash itself. Ky. R. Civ. P. 45; Ky. R. Crim. P. 7.02. However, in a civil case involving a subpoena for records, Kentucky law permits service of a written objection to the subpoenaing party or counsel within ten days of service of the subpoena, which then places the burden on the subpoenaing party to seek an appropriate court order to obtain the requested materials. See Ky. R. Civ. P. 45.04(2).

The subpoenaed party must serve written objection specifying the grounds for his objection upon the attorney seeking the subpoena within ten days after service, or on or before the time directed in the subpoena, if compliance is required within fewer than ten days. La. R.S. 45:1459(C). A "notice of intent" to quash is not required.

There is no requirement that a notice of intent to quash be filed before a motion to quash is served.

There is no requirement that a notice of intent to quash be filed prior to the motion to quash.

Objection to subpoena for circuit court proceeding -- Md. R. Civ. Proc. 2-510(e) -- "On motion of a person served with a subpoena to attend a court proceeding (including a proceeding before a master, auditor, or examiner) or a person named or depicted in an item specified in the subpoena filed promptly and, whenever practicable, at or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance, the court may enter an order . . . including one or more of the following: (1) that the subpoena be quashed or modified; (2) that the subpoena be complied with only at some designated time or place other than that stated in the subpoena; (3) that documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things designated in the subpoena be produced only upon the advancement by the party serving the subpoena of the reasonable costs of producing them; or (4) that documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things designated in the subpoena be delivered to the court at or before the proceeding or before the time when they are to be offered in evidence, subject to further order of court to permit inspection of them."

Objection to subpoena for district court proceeding -- Md. R. Civ. Proc. 3-510(e) (substantively identical to Md. R. Civ. Proc. 2-510(e) except that the there are no references to “electronically stored information”).

Objection to subpoena for deposition -- Md. R. Civ. Proc. 2-510(f) -- "A person served with a subpoena to attend a deposition may seek a protective order pursuant to Rule 2-403. If the subpoena also commands the production of documents, electronically stored information, or tangible things at the deposition, the person served or a person named or depicted in an item specified in the subpoena may seek a protective order pursuant to Rule 2-403 or may file, within ten days after service of the subpoena, an objection to production of any or all of the designated materials. The objection shall be in writing and shall state the reasons for the objection. If an objection is filed, the party serving the subpoena is not entitled to production of the materials except pursuant to an order of the court from which the subpoena was issued. At any time before or within 15 days after completion of the deposition and upon notice to the deponent, the party serving the subpoena may move for an order to compel the production." See also Md. R. Civ. Proc. 3-510(f) (substantially the same except that there is no reference to “electronically stored information”).

Protective Orders -- Md. R. Civ. Proc. 2-403 -- "On motion of a party or of a person from whom discovery is sought, or a person named or depicted in an item sought to be discovered, and for good cause shown, the court may enter any order that justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: (1) that the discovery not be had, (2) that the discovery not be had until other designated discovery has been completed, a pretrial conference has taken place, or some other event or proceeding has occurred, (3) that the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including an allocation of the expenses or a designation of the time or place, (4) that the discovery may be had only by a method of discovery other than that selected by the party seeking discovery, (5) that certain matters not be inquired into or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters, (6) that discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the court, (7) that a deposition, after being sealed, be opened only by order of the court, (8) that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way, (9) that the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the court."

In general, a person claiming a reporter's privilege to refuse to answer certain questions must attend the deposition and object/refuse to answer on a question-by-question basis. Forensic Advisors, Inc. v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., 907 A.2d 855, 35 Med. L. Rep. 1115 (Md. App. 2006), appeal dism'd, 918 A.2d 468 (Md. 2007).

State courts do not require that a notice of intent to quash be filed before the motion to quash.

Under Michigan Court Rule 2.506(H)(1), a person served with a subpoena may appear in person or by writing to explain why the person should not be compelled to comply with the subpoena. Alternatively, a motion to quash can be filed. MCR 2.506(H)(5). It is recommended that if the subpoena is for a court hearing, a letter of explanation or motion to quash precede the hearing.

Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 45 was amended in 2006 and now mirrors, virtually in its entirety, the federal counterpart. Rule 45.04(b) states, "When information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim that it is privileged . . . the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim." Minn. R. Civ. P. 45.04(b).
In a civil action, Rule 45.03(b)(2) permits a written objection to a subpoena for documents, placing the burden on the attorney serving the subpoena to obtain a court order before the materials can be obtained ("[A] person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying may, within 14 days after service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than 14 days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect and copy the materials or inspect the premises except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued."). The objection alone, however, does not relieve the person subpoenaed of the obligation either to appear at the deposition or to move to quash the deposition.
In a criminal action, Rule 22.02 of the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that the district court on motion may quash or modify a subpoena for production of documentary evidence or objects, "if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive." Rule 26.03 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure allows the district court to issue "any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense."

A notice of intent is not required before a party files a motion to quash.

The service of an objection is sufficient. Miss. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B) states that "[t]he person to whom the subpoena is directed may, within ten days after the service thereof or on or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance, if such time is less than ten days after service, serve upon the party serving the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials, or to inspection of the premises. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect and copy the material except pursuant to an order of the court from which the subpoena was issued. The party serving the subpoena may, if objection has been made, move at any time upon notice to the person served for an order to compel the production or inspection."

General practice is to file a motion to quash the subpoena prior to the date of the scheduled deposition/testimony, although an alternative might be to have the witness show up and assert the privilege at the event.  The risk in that scenario is that it might provide a basis for an argument for a contempt order.  On the other hand, it does allow an opportunity to learn the questions to which answers were sought for examination and evaluation of those questions by the court as it determines the extent, if any, to which a reporter’s privilege should be recognized.  The determination of the procedure is best left to the attorney who can consider the facts at hand.

In a civil case a party can make an objection and wait for a motion to quash, Rule 45(c), M.R.Civ.P. Overall however, an objecting party probably puts itself in a better position with a motion to quash.

Resist the subpoena by filing a motion to quash the subpoena in the court it was issued from. Alternatively, if the person served with a subpoena is a party to the litigation, a protective order can be sought pursuant to Nebraska Discovery Rules for all Civil Cases, § 6-326.

In criminal cases a motion to quash should be filed. In civil cases, service of a timely objection may be made pursuant to NRCP 45(c)(2)(B) within “the earlier of the time specified for compliance or 14 days after the subpoena is served.” The receiving party may also file a timely motion to quash or motion for protective order. NRCP 45(c)(3).

No notice of intent to quash needs to be filed.

There is no requirement that notice of intent to quash be provided.

With respect to subpoenas that call for the production of documents or other tangible objects, the person commanded to produce the items may either file a motion to quash, see infra pt. V(B)(3), or else simply serve a timely “written objection” upon all parties.  Rule 1-045(C)(2)(b)(i) NMRA; Rule 5-511(C)(2)(b) NMRA.  If such an objection is made, “the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to inspect[ and] copy the materials ... except under an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued [upon a motion to compel].” Rule 1-045(C)(2)(b)(iii) NMRA; accord Rule 5-511(C)(2)(b) NMRA. Any such written objections must be served within 14 days after service of the subpoena, see Rule 1-045(C)(2)(b) NMRA, “or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than [14] days after service,” Rule 5-511(C)(2)(b) NMRA. The objections must claim the reporter’s privilege “expressly” and must include “a description of the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the claim.” Rule 1-045(D)(2)(a) NMRA; Rule 5-511(D)(2) NMRA.

Although the written-objections alternative is set forth in rules of judicial procedure, it ought to suffice for the purpose of contesting most legislative, administrative, and executive subpoenas as well. Many of the statutes authorizing such extrajudicial subpoenas incorporate court rules. See, e.g., NMSA 1978, § 12-8-15(C) (1969) (Administrative Procedures Act). More importantly, the statutory reporter's privilege applicable to nonjudicial proceedings provides that “application shall be made to the district court of the county in which the proceeding is being held for an order of disclosure,” NMSA 1978, § 38-6-7(C) (1973) – implying that a journalist can discharge her initial obligation merely by objecting to the subpoena instead of moving to quash it.

By placing the burden on the subpoenaing party to file a motion to compel, the service of written objections enables the subpoenaed party to postpone – and occasionally to avoid altogether – the effort and expense of preparing papers for submission to a court. The downside is that the moving party not only gets two briefs to the responding party’s one, but also enjoys the final written word on the subject (the reply brief). But if the briefing sequence is perceived as a serious disadvantage, the journalist can always file a cross-motion to quash along with her response to the motion to compel; and in any event, the district court will almost certainly hold a hearing at which arguments made in reply briefs can be addressed.

If the subpoena commands its recipient not only to produce documents, but also to appear in person to give testimony at a deposition, a hearing, or a trial, written objections will be insufficient, and a motion to quash will be necessary. The rules of procedure do not require a notice of intent or any other filing in advance of such a motion.

A motion to quash, like a motion to compel, is addressed to the court that issued the subpoena. See Rule 1-045(C)(2)(b)(iii), (3)(a) NMRA; Rule 5-511(C)(2)(b), (3)(a) NMRA. If the subpoena is issued in a nonjudicial proceeding, “the district court of the county in which the proceeding is being held” will ultimately be the proper forum, NMSA 1978, § 38-6-7(C) (1973), though in some cases it may be desirable to file an initial motion to quash with the issuing body itself.

Aside from the request to withdraw or modify the subpoena required under CPLR § 2304 and the good faith effort to resolve any disputes concerning the subpoena required by Uniform Rule 202.7, no notice of intent to file a motion to quash or for a protective order is required under New York law. A motion to quash or vacate a subpoena is the proper and exclusive vehicle to challenge the validity of the subpoena or the jurisdiction of the issuing authority. See In re Brunswick Hosp. Ctr., Inc. v. Hynes, 52 N.Y.2d 333, 438 N.Y.S.2d 253 (N.Y. 1981). A particular judge's rules should, however, be consulted.

North Carolina law does not impose any procedural requirements, such as giving a "notice of intent," before a motion to quash or modify a subpoena is filed. A written “objection” must set forth the specific grounds for the objection. N.C. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3).

North Dakota law does not require that a party serve a notice of intent to quash before the motion to quash is submitted. The service of an objection is sufficient.

Rule 45(C)(2)(b), Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure:

Subject to division (D)(2) of this rule, a person commanded to produce under divisions (A)(1)(b), (iii), (iv), (v), or (vi) of this rule may, within fourteen days after service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than fourteen days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objections to production. If objection is made, the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled to production except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued. If objection has been made, the party serving the subpoena, upon notice to the person commanded to produce, may move at any time for an order to compel the production. An order to compel production shall protect any person who is not a party or an officer of a party from significant expense resulting from the production commanded.

Rule 17 of the Ohio Rules of Criminal Procedure does not provide for the filing of an objection or notice of intent.  Crim.R. 17(c) provides that a court may quash a subpoena for production of documentary evidence “if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”  A motion to quash is also the proper method of objecting to a subpoena in a criminal case.

Oklahoma law does not require the filing of a notice of intent to file a motion to quash.  If the subpoena is simply for the production of documents, there is a procedure by which a non–party can by letter or email advise the party issuing the subpoena of an objection, thereby shifting the burden to the party seeking disclosure to file a motion to compel rather than leaving to the party subpoenaed the burden of filing a motion to quash.  Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2004.1 provides that a party or attorney responsible for issuing a subpoena “shall take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense on a person subject to that subpoena.”  Sanctions can be imposed for a breach of that obligation.  Under this statute, a person receiving a subpoena for documents may, before the time for compliance or within 14 days, whichever is earlier, serve a written objection to the subpoena on the issuing party.  The issuing party is thereafter prohibited from inspecting and copying the documents except pursuant to a court order.  The party issuing the subpoena may file a motion to compel, but an order compelling production must protect the person from significant expense in complying with the order.  The response to a motion to compel may, of course, include the assertion of privilege.  Section 2004.1 also allows a party asserting a privilege (e.g., if the subpoena is for the testimony of the journalist) to file a motion to quash without waiting for a motion to compel to be filed.

A person commanded by subpoena to produce records but not commanded to appear, may, within 14 days of service, serve an objection to production on the party or attorney designated in the subpoena.  ORCP 55B.  ORCP 55B also allows the filing of a motion to quash.

The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure provide that any party may “object to [a] subpoena [for documents] by filing of record written objections and serving a copy of the objections upon every other party to the action.” Pa. R. Civ. P. 4009.21(c). A witness, however, must move for a protective order or to quash the subpoena. Pennsylvania does not require the filing of a notice of intent before filing a motion to quash. In some counties, there may be general rules regarding discovery or trial motions. For example, in Philadelphia County, a party filing a motion to quash a discovery subpoena must certify that he or she made an effort to resolve the dispute without court intervention.

It is recommended that a person or entity file a Motion to Quash the Subpoena or a Motion for a Protective Order and not merely object to the subpoena. There are no provisions in Rhode Island law for a "notice of intent."

South Carolina rules of civil practice require consultation in advance with respect to motions, so prior to moving to quash a subpoena in a civil case one would attempt to consult to resolve the issue. If the subpoena is for the production of documents and things, a letter of objection is sufficient to place the subpoena in issue.

This is not a requirement.

The Tennessee shield law provides that the subpoenaing party must affirmatively take action (usually by filing a motion) to have a court divest the media party of the privilege. Tenn. Code Ann. § 24-1-208(c). Thus, the media party is not required to file a motion to quash, but it may do so.

A notice of intent is not required prior to filing a Motion for Protection or to Quash. Once the journalists have served objections on the subpoenaing party or filed a Motion for Protection or to Quash, the journalist does not have to comply with that portion of the subpoena (or the subpoena overall) until or unless ordered to do so by a Court.

Generally, in the case of civil subpoenas, a person must comply with a subpoena unless discharged by the court or by the party summoning the witness. See Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 176.6(a). Therefore, a witness should timely raise objections or seek protection from an oppressive subpoena, if necessary. If the subpoena requires the person to produce documents and items, a subpoenaed person may serve upon the subpoenaing party, at any time before compliance is due, written objections to producing any or all of the designated materials, alleviating the requirement to comply with that portion of the subpoena until ordered to do so by a court. Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 176.6(d). A subpoenaed person who is commanded to appear for a hearing, deposition, or trial may move for protection under Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 192.6 as long as a motion is filed with the court before compliance is due. Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 176.6(e). Furthermore, if the subpoenaed person objects to the time and/or place for a deposition, filing a motion to quash or for protection within three days after receiving the subpoena automatically stays the deposition until the motion can be determined. See Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 199.4.  Great care should be taken to make a timely objection to a request for written discovery as Tex. R. Civ. Proc. 193.2(e) states that the failure to do so results in the waiver of the objection “unless the court excuses the waiver for good cause shown.”

In the case of criminal or a grand jury subpoenas, a subpoenaed person must generally comply on the same terms and grounds as a civil litigant. Thus, the subpoenaed person should timely file a motion to quash.

Utah law does not require that a notice of intent to quash be filed before the motion to quash a subpoena. See Utah R. Civ. P. 7; Utah R. Civ. P. 45. If a party is subpoenaed solely for the production of documents (a subpoena duces tecum), then the party may serve a written objection on the requesting party within the time afforded for compliance. Upon service of this objection, the requesting party is not permitted to inspect the requested documents absent a court order obtained by filing a motion to compel with the court. See Utah R. Civ. P. 45(e)(5). However, a written objection does not relieve a party of its obligation to appear to give testimony pursuant to a subpoena. The party subpoenaed should file a motion to quash before the scheduled date for such an appearance.

If the subpoena requires the inspection or production of documents or things, the person named in the subpoena may, within fourteen (14) days of the service date of the subpoena, serve upon the subpoenaing party written notice of his or her objection to the inspection or production. See V.R.C.P. 45(c)(2)(B).  If an objection is made, the party serving the subpoena must then move for an order compelling the inspection or production from the trial court. Id.  Until an order is issued compelling their production, the subpoenaing party may not access the materials. Id.

If the subpoena requires appearance at deposition or trial, the person named in the subpoena must file a motion to quash or modify the subpoena. See V.R.C.P. 45(c)(3). In this case, there is no provision for filing an objection or a notice of intent prior to filing the motion.

Virginia practice does not require filing a notice of intent to quash.

Washington law does not impose any such requirement. Under CR 45(c)(2), written objections to a subpoena must be served on the party issuing the subpoena.

In West Virginia, there is no requirement that a notice of intent to quash be filed before the motion to quash. Beyond certifying that you have in good faith conferred or are attempting to confer with the counsel for the subpoenaing party, there are no further procedural steps required prior to moving to quash the subpoena to the reporter.

Where only documents are sought by the subpoena, service of an objection (as opposed to a motion to quash) is sufficient. Rule 45(d)(2)(B) of the Rules of Civil Procedure states that when documents are sought by a subpoena, the subpoenaed party "may, within 14 days after service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if such time is less than 14 days after service, serve upon the party or attorney designated in the subpoena written objection to inspection or copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises." The act of serving the objection prohibits the party serving the subpoena from inspecting or copying the materials "except pursuant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued." To overcome the objection, the party serving the subpoena must first move the court to compel compliance with the subpoena; of course, notice of the motion to the person subpoenaed, and of the time and place of any hearing must be given.

Wisconsin statutes do not require a party to file an objection or notice of intent to quash. See Wis. Stat. § 805.07.

No notice of intent to quash is required. However, Rule 45 of the Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure provides an alternate method of challenging a subpoena. A party upon which a subpoena is served seeking the inspection or copying of materials may serve upon the issuing party or his/her attorney an objection to the subpoena. This relieves the subpoenaed party of the obligation to respond to the subpoena. The issuing party may move at any time for an order to compel. The objection must be filed within 14 days of the service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if it is less than 14 days.