Does a company have to comply with a subpoena if corporate headquarters is out of state? Some kind of Diplomatic immunity?

[J.D. Dude]

You didn't answer Quincy's question.

Are you a party to this lawsuit? If so, in what capacity?



Whenever an attorney says he doesn't know, you fire him and get an attorney who does know.

I am a party to the case as the party sending the subpoena and trying to get the information from the Utah resident who I have a contract with and involved in litigation.

The 3rd party has the information about the Utah resident but is claiming they are governed by California law not Utah law.

This 3rd party company is doing business and making money in Utah. They also have a registered agent in Utah who I believe job is to accept legal documents such as this one.

 

[J.D. Dude]

Thank you for expanding on your situation. It sounds familiar. Have you posted here before under a different username?

To answer one of your questions, if a Florida-based company is doing business in Utah, Utah laws (generally) apply, absent a contractual agreement that says another state has jurisdiction in all legal matters. It is conceivable, then, that California law applies to a company doing business in Utah.

I don't have a contract with the 3rd party company.

They are doing a cloud based service with customers in Utah.

However a company policy is not law and this company is not a judge.

 

[zddoodah]

Does a company have to comply with a subpoena if they are sued in a state with a registered agent in, doing business in, over a client in that state if they are incorporated in another state?

Huh?

If a company has a registered agent in State X, then it (not "they") is subject to being sued in State X. If the company is sued in State X, then there would be no need to serve a subpoena on the company. I have no idea what "over a client" means in this sentence.

There is a company doing business in Utah, being sued in Utah, had subpoena delivered to their registered agent in Utah over a client who is also in Utah.

If the subpoena relates to the lawsuit, it is an improper method of obtaining discovery from a party to the lawsuit.

Could Burger king a Florida registered company say that only Florida law applies to them while doing business in California?

It certainly could say that, but it would be wrong.

Perhaps to get around a Coronavirus Mask mandate in California?

Huh?

Are the stores in that state considered like foreign embassy with diplomatic immunity? Each store being considered like Florida soil in a foreign state?

LOL...no.

How does this interstate law work with subpoena compliance?

That question is both vague and ridiculously broad. That said, a subpoena issued in relation to a lawsuit pending in a state court in State X is only effective if served on a deponent in State X.

What did your attorney say when you asked these questions?

He is saying he does not know

If you're a party to this litigation pending in Utah and your attorney doesn't understand how subpoenas work, then you may want to seek out a new attorney.

 

[quincy]

I am a party to the case as the party sending the subpoena and trying to get the information from the Utah resident who I have a contract with and involved in litigation.

The 3rd party has the information about the Utah resident but is claiming they are governed by California law not Utah law.

This 3rd party company is doing business and making money in Utah. They also have a registered agent in Utah who I believe job is to accept legal documents such as this one.

Thanks for the additional information.

It appears you will have to consult with a lawyer in California. The company in question is saying that California law controls. This is not an unusual circumstance when dealing with internet-based companies.

There is no immunity, diplomatic or otherwise.

 

[zddoodah]

As far as I can tell from cobbling together your several posts in this thread, you are a plaintiff in a lawsuit in state court in Utah. You want to serve a subpoena on a non-party to obtain some information that you believe is relevant to the lawsuit. The target of the subpoena (the deponent) is a California corporation that is qualified to do business and has a registered agent in Utah. All correct?

If so, there's no issue. You serve the subpoena on the registered agent. So what's the problem?

 

[quincy]

As far as I can tell from cobbling together your several posts in this thread, you are a plaintiff in a lawsuit in state court in Utah. You want to serve a subpoena on a non-party to obtain some information that you believe is relevant to the lawsuit. The target of the subpoena (the deponent) is a California corporation that is qualified to do business and has a registered agent in Utah. All correct?

If so, there's no issue. You serve the subpoena on the registered agent. So what's the problem?

I read this as a lawsuit initiated in Florida against a California-based company doing business in Utah.

 

[LdiJ]

Thanks for the additional information.

It appears you will have to consult with a lawyer in California. The company in question is saying that California law controls. This is not an unusual circumstance when dealing with internet-based companies.

I think that the OP should first consult a local attorney before consulting one in CA. This appears (at this point) to be a jurisdictional battle and the OP will want to make sure that a judge in Utah cannot compel the registered agent to produce the information required, before he cedes jurisdiction to CA.

 

[quincy]

I think that the OP should first consult a local attorney before consulting one in CA. This appears (at this point) to be a jurisdictional battle and the OP will want to make sure that a judge in Utah cannot compel the registered agent to produce the information required, before he cedes jurisdiction to CA.

I definitely think an attorney needs to be involved - preferably one who knows what he is doing. The one who already has been consulted apparently is not up to the task.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

That being the case I'm with @quincy

Serve them in the state where they are registered and doing business with your "contact."

 

[adjusterjack]

If so, there's no issue. You serve the subpoena on the registered agent. So what's the problem?

Seems to me that the obvious problem is that the CA company does not want to release any information and is throwing up roadblocks in the OP's path.

I'm wondering why OP's attorney doesn't just hire a process server in CA to serve the subpoena there. If that doesn't work then a CA attorney would certainly be necessary. Though I suspect that a company worth billions could find many ways to avoid or delay complying with a subpoena until it gets so costly for OP and OP gives up.

What's bothering me is this. A and B have a contract. B allegedly breached the contract. A can either prove the breach or not prove the breach. C has information about B. What does C's information have to do with A and B's contract and its alleged breach?

 

[quincy]

... What's bothering me is this. A and B have a contract. B allegedly breached the contract. A can either prove the breach or not prove the breach. C has information about B. What does C's information have to do with A and B's contract and its alleged breach?

There is a lot that is bothering me about what has been described.

It sounds to me like the subpoena on the third party for information on the Utah party is a fishing expedition, trying to find out information on the defendant that falls outside the underlying breach of contract suit.

At any rate, a forum is unlikely to be able to solve the problem of service of the subpoena.

 

[J.D. Dude]

Huh?

If a company has a registered agent in State X, then it (not "they") is subject to being sued in State X. If the company is sued in State X, then there would be no need to serve a subpoena on the company. I have no idea what "over a client" means in this sentence.



If the subpoena relates to the lawsuit, it is an improper method of obtaining discovery from a party to the lawsuit.



It certainly could say that, but it would be wrong.



Huh?



LOL...no.



That question is both vague and ridiculously broad. That said, a subpoena issued in relation to a lawsuit pending in a state court in State X is only effective if served on a deponent in State X.



If you're a party to this litigation pending in Utah and your attorney doesn't understand how subpoenas work, then you may want to seek out a new attorney.

Hello.

Let me see if I can help answer some of your questions.

The 3rd party company is not involved in the lawsuit but has valuable information needed for the lawsuit.

The coronavirus mask mandate/ vaccine mandate was an example of how one states laws(Florida) and another states laws(NY or California) have polar opposite laws. What is mandated in NY is expressly illegal in Florida dealing with certain coronavirus mandates vs personal freedom .

So it begs the question if a Florida based company doing business in NY had to comply with Florida law or NY law when both laws are exact polar opposites of each other. Just to make things easier to understand.

In my case, the 3rd party company is claiming that the Utah resident(subject of the subpoena) is being protected by privacy or disclosure laws in California that do not exist in Utah.

They are also claiming that they can't accept a subpoena via their Utah registered agent and it must first be domesticated in California and served in California to be accepted. This part my lawyer said is 100% wrong.

Lawyers are only responsible for laws in their own state not the laws in foreign states or countries.

If this information was clearly established or well known, then a simple google search or youtube search would probably come up with a fast answer.

It feels like it may be a bit of a unknown area of law? Perhaps depends on how the judge feels that day?

If Marijuana is legal in California but illegal in Kentucky. Could a California company do business selling Marijuana in Kentucky and claim they are govern by California (not Kentucky) law? I am thinking probably not?

Are you saying that a registered agent gives the company the ability to be sued in that state( not just documents served)?

The " over a client " was a typo. I was probably trying to say " on a client" Damn this so called " auto correct"

I hope this clears this up.

 

[J.D. Dude]

That being the case I'm with @quincy

Serve them in the state where they are registered and doing business with your "contact."

They have been served in Utah already via their registered agent. They responded by saying it has to be first domesticated and served in California.

They also list this under their company policy on the website however policy is not law.

What would be next? Civil contempt or motion to compel?

 

[quincy]

Again, you need a different lawyer.

State laws apply to in-state residents. When an out-of-state resident is sued, there can be jurisdictional issues that arise. Following is a link that explains jurisdiction:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jurisdiction

Your next step is to serve the subpoena in the proper way to the proper party in the state with jurisdiction.

 

[Zigner]

They have been served in Utah already via their registered agent. They responded by saying it has to be first domesticated and served in California.

They also list this under their company policy on the website however policy is not law.

What would be next? Civil contempt or motion to compel?

The cheapest option may be to do as they suggest.