Libaire v. Kaplan

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “the scope of post-judgment discovery is broad, and a judgment creditor is entitled to a very thorough examination of a judgment debtor with respect to its assets.” (internal quotation marks, alterations, and citations omitted)
• denying motion to quash subpoenas from a “generalized assertion” that they “clearly evidence[d] an effort to harass and unduly burden”
• allowing subpoena of several financial documents, including “credit card statements for the past three years,” because they all directly pertained to defendant’s assets and liabilities and, thus, his ability to pay
• approving similar types of requests stated in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 subpoena
• upholding a post-judgment subpoena that sought the production of confidential and privileged information, such as all financial documents pertaining to any businesses in which the judgment debtor had an ownership interest
• rejecting a generalized assertion that certain document requests “clearly evidence[d] an effort to harass and unduly burden [the subpoenaed party],” and finding that the requests were “sufficiently tailored, given the broad discovery permitted by Rule 69” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).