bulldogg70
Member
What is the name of your state?
The respondent served the petitioners father and mother in the state where the divorce is for depositions. The petitioners father house two residents, one in state, and one out of state. When the petitioners father returned to the out of state residence he filed a motion in their court to quash the subpoena for several reasons. The first reason was because it was not served as to the ruled of the out of state court, but did meet the qualification for the instate court (dead issue). Another reason was because they felt that this was for information that was already presented in interrogatories to the petitioner. That is speculation on their part, and again they used their out of state court rules instead of the instate court rules.
With this being said, I ponder if the respondent should even respond to the out of state, out of court motion or should the respondent move the court to show cause that is in state as to where the subpoena was served. Any suggestions or theories.
The respondent served the petitioners father and mother in the state where the divorce is for depositions. The petitioners father house two residents, one in state, and one out of state. When the petitioners father returned to the out of state residence he filed a motion in their court to quash the subpoena for several reasons. The first reason was because it was not served as to the ruled of the out of state court, but did meet the qualification for the instate court (dead issue). Another reason was because they felt that this was for information that was already presented in interrogatories to the petitioner. That is speculation on their part, and again they used their out of state court rules instead of the instate court rules.
With this being said, I ponder if the respondent should even respond to the out of state, out of court motion or should the respondent move the court to show cause that is in state as to where the subpoena was served. Any suggestions or theories.