MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday, December 10, 2025, Line 6. PLAINTIFF STEVEN HAWTHORNE's MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS.
Plaintiff Steven Hawthorne's Motion to Quash Subpoenas is DENIED. Plaintiff moves to quash or modify two subpoenas for production of business records under Code of Civil Procedure 1987.1. Subdivision (a) of this section provides: "If a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books, documents, electronically stored information, or other things before a court, or at the trial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon motion reasonably made by any person described in subdivision (b), or upon the court's own motion after giving counsel notice and an opportunity to be heard, may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders.
In addition, the court may make any other order as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands, including unreasonable violations of the right of privacy of the person."
The subpoenas are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.) The court must balance relevance to the issues presented in the case and Plaintiff's privacy interest. The court finds Defendant's showing of relevance is compelling and Plaintiff's privacy interest is substantial. Records of modifications made to Plaintiff's apartment after the injury could be relevant to costs Plaintiff incurred as a result of his injury. Evidence of Plaintiff's physical abilities and drug usage may also go towards damages as to the extent of Plaintiff's injuries caused by the incident at issue.
The documents subpoenaed allow for a complete picture of Plaintiff's claims and potential damages. Requests 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 for both subpoenas are limited to documents from within the past 5 years. Plaintiff's financial data and social security number shall be redacted from all responsive documents produced pursuant to the subpoenas.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/CM) | |