McCrea v. Parsons

How courts have described this case

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

• “[I]t is settled that a subpoena is limited in scope by Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”
• “[I]t is settled that a subpoena is limited in scope by Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”
• “No requirement of relevance is included in the text of Rule 45; however, it is settled that a subpoena is limited in scope by Rule 26(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”
• “This court has determined that ‘[a] showing of relevance can be viewed as a showing of need; for the purpose of prosecuting or defending a specific pending civil action, one is presumed to have no need of a matter not relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).