Mount Hope Church v. Bash Back!

Good Law
2012 D.A.R. 15·705 F.3d 418·2012 WL 5907498·84 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 159·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 24233
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 26, 201211-35632California5,120 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

Mount Hope Church (“Mount Hope” or “the Church”) appeals a sanction order granting attorneys’ fees and costs to Ap-pellees Riseup Networks (“Riseup”) and Objector dkwatt@riseup.net (“dkwatt”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(1). The order, which followed the quashing of a subpoena seeking identifying information for seven email account holders, found that Mount Hope did not take reasonable steps to avoid imposing an undue burden on Appellees, who were non-parties to the underlying case, when it “shifted its justification for the subpoena multiple times” and “refus[ed] to engage with the applicable [First Amendment] legal standards” in a timely manner. Because there are few published federal court decisions on the meaning of Rule 45(c)(l)’s “undue burden” language as a basis for sanctions, and to place the sanction here in a broader perspective, we write to clarify the scope of that rule. Holding that Rule 45(c)(1) cannot properly support a sanction where the cost of complying with the subpoena is minimal and there is no showing that the subpoena was facially defective or issued in bad faith, we reverse.

I

This appeal concerns satellite litigation related to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.