211 So. 3d 528
La. Ct. App.2017Background
- Plaintiff in a mesothelioma action served trial subpoenas on multiple defendant corporations (non-domiciliaries) to produce corporate representatives in court.
- Defendants moved to quash; the trial court granted the motions for corporations not domiciled in Louisiana.
- Plaintiff sought supervisory writs; this Court initially denied (2-1), then the Louisiana Supreme Court remanded for full briefing, argument, and opinion.
- Central legal question: whether Louisiana courts may compel nonresident parties who participate in Louisiana litigation to appear for discovery or trial.
- Lower and appellate jurisprudence presented conflicting approaches: Cattle Farms limited subpoenas to residents/employees in Louisiana; subsequent cases applied a discretionary, fairness-based test allowing subpoenas of nonresident parties subject to hardship considerations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Louisiana subpoena power extends to nonresident parties who invoke or participate in Louisiana litigation | Louisiana courts may subpoena nonresident parties who invoke the court’s jurisdiction; parties participating in litigation are subject to subpoena power | La. C.C.P. art. 1352 limits subpoenas to witnesses who reside or are employed in Louisiana; nonresidents not employed in-state cannot be compelled | Court held nonresident parties (plaintiffs or defendants) can be compelled to appear, but subpoena power is discretionary and must consider hardship factors; trial court’s quashes reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Cattle Farms, Inc. v. Abercrombie, 146 So.2d 689 (La. Ct. App. 1962) (held subpoenas limited by Art. 1352; adverse-party testimony subject to that restriction)
- Hohner v. Travelers Ins. Co., 246 So.2d 727 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1971) (refused to compel nonresident plaintiff’s deposition based on expense and availability of other discovery)
- Broda v. Jack Sutton Co., Inc., 488 So.2d 226 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1986) (applied discretionary hardship analysis to decline to compel nonresident plaintiff)
- Transworld Fin. Servs. Corp. v. Briscoe, 459 So.2d 100 (La. App. 2nd Cir. 1984) (held nonresident plaintiffs invoking Louisiana jurisdiction are subject to subpoena power; courts should weigh inconvenience and expense)
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. OKC Ltd. P’ship, 634 So.2d 1186 (La. 1994) (noted that a nonresident defendant party, once subject to personal jurisdiction, probably could be compelled to give deposition)
- In re Medical Review Panel of Hughes, 807 So.2d 1074 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2002) (held nonresident party defendants are subject to subpoena power but remanded for trial court to apply hardship/complexity/recovery factors)