Motion to Quash Subpoena in Maryland

What Is a Motion to Quash Subpoena?

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion to Quash Subpoena

“Maryland's discovery rules, governed by Chapter 400 of Title 2 of the Maryland Rules, were deliberately designed to be broad and comprehensive in scope." (See Ehrlich v. Grove (2007) 396 Md. 550, 560, 914 A.2d 783; Saint Luke Inst., Inc. v. Jones (2020) 471 Md. 312, 332-33.)

“Subpoenas, according to Maryland Rule 2-510(a), may be issued to compel a party over whom the court has acquired jurisdiction to attend, give testimony, and produce and permit inspection [and] copying . . . of designated documents . . . or tangible things at a deposition, the service of which is permitted by Rule 2-121(a)(3).” (See Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Mixter, Misc. Docket AG No. 7, at *11-12 (Md. Feb. 2, 2015).)

“A subpoena shall not be used for any other purpose.” (See id.)

“If the court, on motion of a party alleging a violation of this section or on its own initiative, after affording the alleged violator a hearing, finds that a party or attorney used or attempted to use a subpoena for a purpose other than a purpose allowed under this section, the court may impose an appropriate sanction upon the party or attorney, including an award of a reasonable attorney's fee and costs, the exclusion of evidence obtained by the subpoena, and reimbursement of any person inconvenienced for time and expenses incurred.” (See id.)

Procedural Steps Involved in Filing a Motion to Quash Subpoena under Rule 2-510

“Maryland Rule 2-510, entitled ‘Subpoenas,’ provides, in pertinent part that on motion of a person served with a subpoena to attend a court proceeding (including a proceeding before a master, auditor, or examiner) filed promptly and, whenever practicable, at or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance, the court may enter an order that justice requires to protect the person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or cost, including one or more of the following:

that the subpoena be quashed or modified;
that the subpoena be complied with only at some designated time or place other than that stated in the subpoena;
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
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.”

(See Unnamed Attorney v. Attorney Grievance, 409 Md. 509, 520 n.10 (Md. 2009); Md. R. Civ. P. Cir. Ct. 2-510.)

“A motion filed under this section based on a claim that information is privileged or subject to protection as work product materials shall be supported by a description of the nature of each item that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to evaluate the claim.” (See id.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion to Quash Subpoena

“A court's order denying a motion to quash a subpoena is ordinarily reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard.” (See WBAL-TV Div., Hearst Corp. v. State (1984) 300 Md. 233, 247, 477 A.2d 776; Doe v. Maryland Board of Social Workers (2004) 154 Md. App. 520, 528 n.7.)

“We have held that a trial court abuses its discretion where no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court.” (See Unnamed Attorney v. Attorney Grievance (2009) 409 Md. 509, 520; Metheny v. State (2000) 359 Md. 576, 604, 755 A.2d 1088, 1104; In re Adoption/Guardianship No. 3598, 347 Md. 295, 312, 701 A.2d 110, 118 (1997).)

“Thus, we cannot reverse the order denying the motion to quash the subpoena unless we are persuaded that no reasonable person would have denied it.” (See id.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion to Quash Subpoena

It is well settled that “Md. Rule 4-266(c), governing subpoenas, permits a circuit court to quash a subpoena for good cause shown . . . which justice requires to protect the . . . person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense[.]” (See Thurston v. State, No. 182, at *35 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Aug. 3, 2020).)

It is also well settled that “the threefold test for determining the validity of a subpoena issued by an administrative agency is: whether the inquiry is authorized by statute, the information sought is relevant to the inquiry, and the demand is not too indefinite or overbroad." (See Miller v. Baltimore County P.D (2008) 179 Md. App. 370, 381-82; Banach v. St. Comm'n on Human rel (1976) 277 Md. 502, 506.)

Dockets for Motion to Quash Subpoena in Maryland

Sort By

In the Matter of George Dandan

Filed

May 09, 2024

Status

Closed

Court

Montgomery County

County

Montgomery County, MD

Case #