.jpg)
2004 Exam of nondebtors - is a subpoena required?
If you draft the 2004 order to state that the debtor or other witness must appear a subpoena is not necessary, however, if the witness does not show up, it is much harder to get sanctions for not appearing than if you served the order and a subpoena.
Dennis McGoldrick, 350 S. Crenshaw Bl., #A207B, Torrance, Ca 90503 310-328-1001-voice
> On Jun 23, 2015, at 10:01 AM, 'Steven B. Lever' sblever@leverlaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
> Yes. Its a one page form you sign.
>
>
>
> Steven B. Lever
>
>
>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 9:51 AM
> To: cdcbaa; Strictly Bankruptcy Issues
> Subject: [cdcbaa] 2004 Exam of nondebtors - is a subpoena required?
>
>
>
>
>
> To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need to subpoena them to appear?
>
> The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling attendance with a subpoena.
>
> Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
>
>
>
> Holly Roark
>
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>
> and Sports Lawyer
>
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
>
> www.roarklawoffices.com
>
> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
>
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208) 922-5100
>
>
type="text/html";
boundaryple-Mail-177DC5C4-0DB6-47CB-96AB-86A10E587592
On Jun 23, 2015, at 10:01 AM, 'Steven B. Lever' sblever@leverlaw.com [cdcbaa] <cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Steven B. Lever From: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com [mailto:cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 9:51 AMTo: cdcbaa; Strictly Bankruptcy IssuesSubject: [cdcbaa] 2004 Exam of nondebtors - is a subpoena required? To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need to subpoena them to appear?The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling attendance with a subpoena.Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?Holly RoarkCertified Bankruptcy Specialist*and Sports Lawyerholly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**www.roarklawoffices.comCentral District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization**Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208) 922-5100
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Thanks. This is actually for an Idaho case. The local rules don't address
the subpoena, but all the parties can submit an agreed order for
attendance. Without an agreement, I would think a subpoena is required for
a nondebtor to attend.
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
**Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
922-5100
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I am sorry, I assumed you were in Central District. I quoted you the local
> rules.
>
> Even if you did not have to issue a subpoena (because the party agreed to
> voluntarily attend), you would want to subpoena them anyway as a means of
> making sure they stick to their promise. FRBP 2004 incorporates FRBP 9016
> which gives you the authority to subpoena.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
> Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
> 15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
> Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
> Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
>
> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I am looking at the online version of FRBP at Cornell and paragraph (e)
>> says "mileage", not "subpoena".
>> https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_2004
>>
>> Anyway, your version makes sense.
>>
>>
>>
>> Holly Roark
>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>> *and Sports Lawyer*
>> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
>> www.roarklawoffices.com
>> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
>> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>>
>> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>>
>> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
>> 922-5100
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Michael Avanesian
>> michael@avanesianlaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, see part (e).
>>>
>>> (e) Subpoena. If the court approves a Rule 2004 examination *of an
>>> entity other than the **debtor*, the attendance of the entity for
>>> examination and for the production of documents must be compelled by
>>> subpoena issued, and served pursuant to FRBP 9016
>>> and F.R.Civ.P. 45.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
>>> Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
>>> 15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
>>> Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
>>> Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
>>>
>>> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
>>> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
>>> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
>>> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
>>> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
>>> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>>>
>>> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
>>> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
>>> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
>>> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
>>> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
>>> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
>>> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
>>> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you
>>>> need to subpoena them to appear?
>>>>
>>>> The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be
>>>> examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling
>>>> attendance with a subpoena.
>>>>
>>>> Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Holly Roark
>>>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>>>> *and Sports Lawyer*
>>>> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
>>>> www.roarklawoffices.com
>>>> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
>>>> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>>>> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>>>>
>>>> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>>>>
>>>> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
>>>> 922-5100
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Thanks. This is actually for an Idaho case. The local rules don't address the subpoena, but all the parties can submit an agreed order for attendance. Without an agreement, I would think a subpoena is required for a nondebtor to attend. Holly RoarkCertified Bankruptcy Specialist*and Sports Lawyer
holly@roarklawoffices.com**primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I am sorry, I assumed you were in Central District. I quoted you the local
rules.
Even if you did not have to issue a subpoena (because the party agreed to
voluntarily attend), you would want to subpoena them anyway as a means of
making sure they stick to their promise. FRBP 2004 incorporates FRBP 9016
which gives you the authority to subpoena.
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> I am looking at the online version of FRBP at Cornell and paragraph (e)
> says "mileage", not "subpoena".
> https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_2004
>
> Anyway, your version makes sense.
>
>
>
> Holly Roark
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
> *and Sports Lawyer*
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
> www.roarklawoffices.com
> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
> 922-5100
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Michael Avanesian
> michael@avanesianlaw.com [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Yes, see part (e).
>>
>> (e) Subpoena. If the court approves a Rule 2004 examination *of an
>> entity other than the **debtor*, the attendance of the entity for
>> examination and for the production of documents must be compelled by
>> subpoena issued, and served pursuant to FRBP 9016
>> and F.R.Civ.P. 45.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
>> Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
>> 15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
>> Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
>> Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
>>
>> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
>> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
>> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
>> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
>> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
>> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>>
>> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
>> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
>> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
>> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
>> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
>> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
>> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
>> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need
>>> to subpoena them to appear?
>>>
>>> The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be
>>> examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling
>>> attendance with a subpoena.
>>>
>>> Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
>>>
>>>
>>> Holly Roark
>>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>>> *and Sports Lawyer*
>>> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
>>> www.roarklawoffices.com
>>> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
>>> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>>> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>>>
>>> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>>>
>>> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
>>> 922-5100
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
I am sorry, I assumed you were in Central District. I quoted you the local rules.Even if you did not have to issue a subpoena (because the party agreed to voluntarily attend), you would want to subpoena them anyway as a means of making sure they stick to their promise. FRBP 2004 incorporates FRBP 9016 which gives you the authority to subpoena.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I am looking at the online version of FRBP at Cornell and paragraph (e)
says "mileage", not "subpoena".
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_2004
Anyway, your version makes sense.
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
**Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
922-5100
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Michael Avanesian michael@avanesianlaw.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> Yes, see part (e).
>
> (e) Subpoena. If the court approves a Rule 2004 examination *of an entity
> other than the **debtor*, the attendance of the entity for examination
> and for the production of documents must be compelled by subpoena issued,
> and served pursuant to FRBP 9016
> and F.R.Civ.P. 45.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> *Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
> Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
> 15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
> Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
> Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
>
> *Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
> legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
> use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
> copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
> to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
>
> *IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
> imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
> contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
> or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
> for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
> or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
> transaction or matter addressed herein.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
> [cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need
>> to subpoena them to appear?
>>
>> The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be
>> examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling
>> attendance with a subpoena.
>>
>> Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
>>
>>
>> Holly Roark
>> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
>> *and Sports Lawyer*
>> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
>> www.roarklawoffices.com
>> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
>> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
>> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>>
>> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>>
>> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
>> 922-5100
>>
>>
>
>
I am looking at the online version of FRBP at Cornell and paragraph (e) says "mileage", not "subpoena".w.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_2004Anyway, your version makes sense.Holly RoarkCertified Bankruptcy Specialist*and Sports Lawyer
holly@roarklawoffices.com**primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yes, see part (e).
(e) Subpoena. If the court approves a Rule 2004 examination *of an entity
other than the **debtor*, the attendance of the entity for examination and
for the production of documents must be compelled by subpoena issued, and
served pursuant to FRBP 9016
and F.R.Civ.P. 45.
Sincerely,
*Michael Avanesian, Esq. *
Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP
15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
*Confidentiality**: *This electronic transmission and its contents are
legally privileged and confidential information and intended solely for the
use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,
copying or other use of this message and its contents is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please reply
to us immediately and delete this message from your directory.
*IRS Circular 230 Disclosure:* To ensure compliance with requirements
imposed by the IRS, please be advised that any U.S. federal tax advice
contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended
or written to be used or relied upon, and cannot be used or relied upon,
for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code,
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any
transaction or matter addressed herein.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Holly Roark hollyroark22@gmail.com
[cdcbaa] wrote:
>
>
> To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need
> to subpoena them to appear?
>
> The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be
> examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling
> attendance with a subpoena.
>
> Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
>
>
> Holly Roark
> Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
> *and Sports Lawyer*
> holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
> www.roarklawoffices.com
> Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
> 1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
> T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
>
> *By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
>
> **Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
> 922-5100
>
>
>
Yes, see part (e).(e) Subpoena. If the court approves a Rule 2004 examination of an entity other than thedebtor, the attendance of the entity for examination and for the production of documents must be compelled by subpoena issued, and served pursuant to FRBP 9016and F.R.Civ.P. 45.Sincerely,Michael Avanesian, Esq.Simon Resnik Hayes, LLP15233 Ventura Blvd., Suite 250Sherman Oaks, CA 91403Tel: 818.783.6251 | Cel: 818.817.1725
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need to
subpoena them to appear?
The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be examined
on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling attendance
with a subpoena.
Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?
Holly Roark
Certified Bankruptcy Specialist*
*and Sports Lawyer*
holly@roarklawoffices.com **primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
*By State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
**Counsel for Chapter 13 Trustee Kathleen A. McCallister (Idaho) T (208)
922-5100
To do a 2004 Exam of a nondebtor, is a Motion sufficient, or do you need to subpoena them to appear?The Rule is confusing to me. 2004(a) says that "any entity" may be examined on motion by a party in interest, but (c) talks about compelling attendance with a subpoena.Is a subpoena required to take the exam of a nondebtor?Holly RoarkCertified Bankruptcy Specialist*and Sports Lawyer
holly@roarklawoffices.com**primary email address**
www.roarklawoffices.com
Central District of California - Consumer Bankruptcy Attorney
1875 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067
T (310) 553-2600; F (310) 553-2601
The post was migrated from Yahoo.