Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
US Federal District Court: a) refuses application by academic institution to quash subpoena requesting confidential interviews; b) grants application for in camera review of relevant materials; and c) refuses application to intervene made by directors of oral history project.
Application to quash subpoena - confidential interviews from oral history project - whether subpoena "unreasonable or oppressive" - Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)(2) - documents relating to interviews - confidentiality agreementswith interviewees - request for documents relating to abduction of death in Northern Ireland - interviews with members of Provisional IRA - academic exercise - warning by college that interviews might not be confidential in face of court order - contract guaranteeing confidentiality "to the extent that American law allows" - subpoena issued pursuant to treaty between US and UK - treaty having force of law - "United Kingdom Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty" - text of treaty - laws of requested state - ambiguity in wording of treaty - discretion of court - Foreign Evidence Request Efficiency Act 2009 - whether conflict between treaty and 2009 legislation - discretion of court to review motion to quash subpoena - standard of review - comparison with review of grand jury subpoena - academic privilege and need for confidentiality - seriousness of relevant offences - harm to free flow of information - chilling effect - application to intervene by directors of project .
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only fast reporting service for all Irish judgments over the past ten years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now