RADCLIFFE v. CUBESMART ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC.
1:24-cv-01056
S.D. Ind.Nov 21, 2024Background
- Terris Radcliffe, proceeding pro se, is the plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit alleging harm from an elevator accident at a Cubesmart facility.
- None of the defendants are state entities or state employees; they include individuals and business entities.
- Radcliffe served a subpoena duces tecum on the non-party Indiana Office of Inspector General (OIG), requesting investigative guidelines, materials on IDHS, and an explanation regarding OIG’s investigative decisions.
- The OIG moved to quash the subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45.
- Radcliffe did not file any response to the motion to quash.
- The court reviewed the subpoena demands, the amended complaint, and the motion to quash before issuing its ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the subpoena is specific, relevant, and not unduly burdensome | Sought broad materials and explanations to support claims | Subpoena is overbroad, not specific, irrelevant, unduly burdensome, and violates procedure | Subpoena is quashed; OIG's motion granted |
| Whether the subpoena allowed a reasonable time to respond | Demanded production within 2 days | Unreasonable time frame violates Rule 45 | Subpoena is quashed for unreasonable timing |
| Whether confidential or privileged information must be disclosed | Sought internal guidelines and investigation justifications | Disclosure would require confidential or privileged information | No obligation to disclose privileged info |
| Whether a subpoena may demand interrogatory-type explanation from a non-party | Demanded explanation from OIG for not investigating fraud | Attempt to serve interrogatory on non-party is improper under Rule 33(a) | Improper; subpoena quashed |
Key Cases Cited
- None reported with official reporter citations; all cited cases are unreported or use only Westlaw/Lexis citations in this opinion.