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.
An Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive is a legal document filed in the state of Ohio to challenge a subpoena that demands the production of documents or materials. In this affidavit, the affine, who is typically the recipient of the subpoena, provides a detailed description and explanation of why the subpoena should be quashed. The affine argues that the subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive, meaning it places an undue burden on the individual or entity being subpoenaed. Keywords: Ohio, Affidavit, Motion to Quash, Subpoena Ducks Cecum, Unreasonable, Oppressive, Legal Document Different types of Ohio Affidavits in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive may include: 1. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Based on Lack of Relevance: This type of affidavit argues that the subpoenaed documents or materials are irrelevant to the legal matter at hand, thus making the subpoena unreasonable and oppressive. 2. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Due to Undue Burden: This affidavit focuses on the significant burden or hardship that complying with the subpoena would impose on the affine. It may argue that retrieving and producing the requested documents would require excessive time, resources, or disruption of regular business operations. 3. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Based on Legal Privilege: This type of affidavit asserts that the requested documents are protected by legal privilege, such as attorney-client privilege or doctor-patient privilege. The affine argues that compelling the disclosure of such privileged information would violate their rights and render the subpoena unreasonable and oppressive. 4. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum for Lack of Proper Service: This affidavit challenges the validity of the subpoena, claiming that it was not properly served to the recipient. The affine may argue that the subpoena was delivered to the wrong address, not received within the required timeframe, or not served in accordance with Ohio's legal procedures. By diligently preparing an Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive, individuals and entities in Ohio can effectively challenge burdensome and unjust subpoenas, protecting their rights and interests in legal proceedings.An Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive is a legal document filed in the state of Ohio to challenge a subpoena that demands the production of documents or materials. In this affidavit, the affine, who is typically the recipient of the subpoena, provides a detailed description and explanation of why the subpoena should be quashed. The affine argues that the subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive, meaning it places an undue burden on the individual or entity being subpoenaed. Keywords: Ohio, Affidavit, Motion to Quash, Subpoena Ducks Cecum, Unreasonable, Oppressive, Legal Document Different types of Ohio Affidavits in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive may include: 1. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Based on Lack of Relevance: This type of affidavit argues that the subpoenaed documents or materials are irrelevant to the legal matter at hand, thus making the subpoena unreasonable and oppressive. 2. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Due to Undue Burden: This affidavit focuses on the significant burden or hardship that complying with the subpoena would impose on the affine. It may argue that retrieving and producing the requested documents would require excessive time, resources, or disruption of regular business operations. 3. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum Based on Legal Privilege: This type of affidavit asserts that the requested documents are protected by legal privilege, such as attorney-client privilege or doctor-patient privilege. The affine argues that compelling the disclosure of such privileged information would violate their rights and render the subpoena unreasonable and oppressive. 4. Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum for Lack of Proper Service: This affidavit challenges the validity of the subpoena, claiming that it was not properly served to the recipient. The affine may argue that the subpoena was delivered to the wrong address, not received within the required timeframe, or not served in accordance with Ohio's legal procedures. By diligently preparing an Ohio Affidavit in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena Ducks Cecum on the Grounds that Subpoena is Unreasonable and Oppressive, individuals and entities in Ohio can effectively challenge burdensome and unjust subpoenas, protecting their rights and interests in legal proceedings.
