A motion to quash asks the judge for an order setting aside or nullifying an action, such as "quashing" service of a summons.
This form is a generic example that may be referred to when preparing such a form for your particular state. It is for illustrative purposes only. Local laws should be consulted to determine any specific requirements for such a form in a particular jurisdiction.
A Michigan Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive is a legal document that seeks to challenge the validity and enforceability of a subpoena duces tecum, specifically on the grounds that it is unreasonable and oppressive. This motion is typically filed by the person or party who has been served with the subpoena and believes that compliance would result in an undue burden or hardship. In the state of Michigan, there are different types of motions to quash a subpoena duces tecum on the grounds of being unreasonable and oppressive. These include: 1. Personal Privacy: This type of motion seeks to protect an individual's privacy rights when the requested documents contain highly personal or sensitive information that is unrelated to the case. If the court finds that the subpoena seeks irrelevant or unnecessary personal information, it may quash the subpoena to protect the individual's privacy. 2. Over breadth: A motion based on over breadth argues that the subpoena is excessively broad or vague in its demands, and therefore unreasonable. The party filing the motion asserts that the subpoena extends beyond what is necessary for the case and may result in an unnecessary burden or invasion of privacy. 3. Burden of Production: This type of motion asserts that compliance with the subpoena would impose an undue burden or hardship on the subpoenaed party. The burden of production can be based on the voluminous nature of the requested documents, the costs associated with gathering or producing them, or the disruption it would cause to the normal course of business or personal life. 4. Relevance: A motion based on relevance challenges the subpoena by arguing that the requested documents are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The party filing the motion contends that the subpoena is being used as a fishing expedition or harassment tactic rather than for legitimate discovery purposes. In preparing a Michigan Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive, it is important to include the relevant keywords such as "Michigan," "motion to quash subpoena duces tecum," "unreasonable and oppressive," "privacy rights," "over breadth," "burden of production," and "relevance." These keywords will ensure that the document is both legally comprehensive and search engine optimized.A Michigan Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive is a legal document that seeks to challenge the validity and enforceability of a subpoena duces tecum, specifically on the grounds that it is unreasonable and oppressive. This motion is typically filed by the person or party who has been served with the subpoena and believes that compliance would result in an undue burden or hardship. In the state of Michigan, there are different types of motions to quash a subpoena duces tecum on the grounds of being unreasonable and oppressive. These include: 1. Personal Privacy: This type of motion seeks to protect an individual's privacy rights when the requested documents contain highly personal or sensitive information that is unrelated to the case. If the court finds that the subpoena seeks irrelevant or unnecessary personal information, it may quash the subpoena to protect the individual's privacy. 2. Over breadth: A motion based on over breadth argues that the subpoena is excessively broad or vague in its demands, and therefore unreasonable. The party filing the motion asserts that the subpoena extends beyond what is necessary for the case and may result in an unnecessary burden or invasion of privacy. 3. Burden of Production: This type of motion asserts that compliance with the subpoena would impose an undue burden or hardship on the subpoenaed party. The burden of production can be based on the voluminous nature of the requested documents, the costs associated with gathering or producing them, or the disruption it would cause to the normal course of business or personal life. 4. Relevance: A motion based on relevance challenges the subpoena by arguing that the requested documents are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The party filing the motion contends that the subpoena is being used as a fishing expedition or harassment tactic rather than for legitimate discovery purposes. In preparing a Michigan Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive, it is important to include the relevant keywords such as "Michigan," "motion to quash subpoena duces tecum," "unreasonable and oppressive," "privacy rights," "over breadth," "burden of production," and "relevance." These keywords will ensure that the document is both legally comprehensive and search engine optimized.
