Attorney-at-Law

RULE 70(g)(2)

In Uncategorized on 11/07/2023 at 09:12

It’s rare this subsection is invoked, wherefore I wish Judge Goeke had told us the facts, arguments, and background in his order in Halyard Holdings, LLC, Halyard Holdings Group, LLC, Tax Matters Partner, et al., Docket No. 14145-21, filed 11/7/23.

There are 23 (count ’em, 23, and I did) docket numbers (hence cases) involved in this subpoena quash or modify. Apparently some or all of these are consolidated. The ostensible quasher or modifier is a well-known real estate operator-broker. I can only speculate what petitioners’ counsel wanted from these guys other than free advice.

Of course, I’ve reached out to find sources, and will publish whatever I can.

But it is so rare that legal fees are on the table in discovery matters that it would be very disappointing if we were left with no guidance. Flying blind into unknown terrain rarely ends well, especially when the unknown terrain is Dixieland Boondockery.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.