1:22-cv-04074
S.D.N.Y.Sep 7, 2023Background
- Court entered a money judgment for plaintiff Creative Glassware Industrial Co., Ltd. against defendant Lifestyle International LLC for $198,189.20 (judgment entered Dec. 19, 2022).
- Plaintiff served a Rule 45 subpoena to produce documents on Lifestyle on May 15, 2023 (proof of service shows service on Arlene Sanchez at 2045 Lincoln Hwy, Edison, NJ).
- Subpoena sought bank account information (monthly statements), annual tax information, and all property/assets of Lifestyle; commanded production in New York on May 20, 2023.
- Defendant did not respond to the subpoena by the response date.
- Plaintiff relies on Fed. R. Civ. P. 69 (enforcing federal judgment by state procedures) and Rule 45 (subpoena enforcement and contempt) and asks the court to (1) compel responses within two weeks and (2) warn that continued noncompliance will result in contempt and daily penalties.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of subpoena on judgment debtor | Subpoena is proper enforcement tool under FRCP 69 and 45 to discover assets to satisfy judgment | No response filed; no objections presented | No ruling in the record supplied (motion filed; outcome not included) |
| Sufficiency of service | Subpoena and proof of service were timely served on authorized agent (Arlene Sanchez) | Defendant has not disputed service in this filing | No ruling in the record supplied |
| Scope of requested documents (bank records, tax returns, assets) | Requests are directly relevant to satisfaction of money judgment and permissible discovery | No objections on record (no privilege or overbreadth asserted) | No ruling in the record supplied |
| Request for contempt and daily penalties for noncompliance | Plaintiff seeks an order compelling production within two weeks and warning of contempt/daily fines under Rule 45(g) | Defendant has not responded to oppose or present defenses | No ruling in the record supplied |
Key Cases Cited
- No officially reported (i.e., reporter-cited) cases are cited in the submitted filing; the filing cites several district-court opinions only available on Westlaw/LEXIS but no published reporter authorities.