Fracasse v. Equifax Information Services LLC, 5:18-cv-635-Oc-PRL. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20191106b78
Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER PHILIP R. LAMMENS , Magistrate Judge . On September 27, 2019, non-party Tabatha Hendrickson filed a motion to quash "any subpoena regarding" the instant case. (Doc. 33). The Court denied that motion because Ms. Hendrickson had not identified any specific subpoena directed to her, and thus, there was nothing for the Court to quash. (Doc. 40). Now, in her motion for reconsideration, Ms. Hendrickson asks the Court to quash a subpoena that was served on her internet provider, Cox Communic
Summary: ORDER PHILIP R. LAMMENS , Magistrate Judge . On September 27, 2019, non-party Tabatha Hendrickson filed a motion to quash "any subpoena regarding" the instant case. (Doc. 33). The Court denied that motion because Ms. Hendrickson had not identified any specific subpoena directed to her, and thus, there was nothing for the Court to quash. (Doc. 40). Now, in her motion for reconsideration, Ms. Hendrickson asks the Court to quash a subpoena that was served on her internet provider, Cox Communica..
More
ORDER
PHILIP R. LAMMENS, Magistrate Judge.
On September 27, 2019, non-party Tabatha Hendrickson filed a motion to quash "any subpoena regarding" the instant case. (Doc. 33). The Court denied that motion because Ms. Hendrickson had not identified any specific subpoena directed to her, and thus, there was nothing for the Court to quash. (Doc. 40). Now, in her motion for reconsideration, Ms. Hendrickson asks the Court to quash a subpoena that was served on her internet provider, Cox Communications. (Doc. 41). Plaintiff, however, advised the Court that Cox Communications has already complied with the subpoena and produced the requested documents. (Doc. 43). Accordingly, Ms. Hendrickson's motion (Doc. 41) is due to be DENIED as moot.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
