Scott v. Maggio

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “evidence of the context in which the demand is made is certainly relevant and admissible”
• noting that evidence of settlements may have an “undue tendency to suggest decision on an improper basis”
• explaining that “Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) allows for quashing a subpoena otherwise within the court’s subpoena power”
• finding that an officer of the defendant was not subject to the subpoena power of the court and writing, “Rule 45(b)(2) defines the court’s subpoena power, and [the defendant’s officer] is beyond it, while Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii
• limiting it analysis to the text of Rule 45 and concluding that “Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) simply does not extend the range of this court’s subpoena power”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).