Citing “Unique Burden” of Restoring Email from Backup Tapes and “Special Weight” to be Accorded Non-Party’s Status, Court Grants Motion to Quash Subpoena
United States v. Amerigroup Ill., Inc., 2005 WL 3111972 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 21, 2005)
In this qui tam suit filed under the False Claims Act and the Illinois Whistelblower Act, plaintiff alleged that defendants submitted false or fraudulent claims for payment by omitting certain information from quarterly statements submitted to the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (“HFS”). Defendants served a subpoena upon HFS seeking, among other things, email from certain employees. HFS moved to quash, and after several conferences with the court, defendants agreed to limit the request to the emails of two individuals currently employed by HFS and one former employee. Defendants also agreed that HFS could limit the search terms to be used in retrieving the desired emails to those set out by the defendants. Unhappy still, HFS maintained that the subpoena must be quashed under Rule 45(c)(3)(A)(iv) because the request was unduly burdensome and the emails were irrelevant and unlikely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Read More