Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Raap v. Brier & Thorn, Inc.

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division

June 7, 2017

MATTHEW RAAP, Plaintiff,
v.
BRIER & THORN, INC., Defendant.

         Underlying Case No. 16-cv-1690 pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin (the Underlying Action)

          OPINION

          SUE E. MYERSCOUGH, U.S. District Judge.

         This cause is before the Court on Bank of Springfield's Motion to Quash Subpoena Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (d/e 1). Because the subpoena compels compliance at a location more than 100 miles from where Bank of Springfield is located or regularly transacts business and is unduly burdensome, the Motion is GRANTED.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On or about May 3, 2017, Matthew Raap, the plaintiff in the above-captioned matter in Wisconsin (the Underlying Litigation), served a subpoena to produce documents on the Bank of Springfield. The subpoena was directed to Tom Marantz, Bank of Springfield's Chief Executive Officer, in Springfield, Illinois. The subpoena commanded the production of the following:

All documents reflecting your relationship with Brier & Thorn including, but not limited to, all emails, texts, messaging, memos, notes, letters, proposals, invoices, bills, payment records, purchase orders, correspondence, summaries, evaluations, assessments, reviews, accou[n]ting records, and all other communications or documents reflecting your involvement with Brier & Thorn and/or the work it performed for your company.

Mot., Ex. 1 (d/e 1) (the subpoena was issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin). The subpoena directed Bank of Springfield to produce the documents on or before May 19, 2017 at 3:00 p.m. to Krystal Williams-Oby at 1402 Pankratz Street, Suite 103, Madison Wisconsin 53704.

         The above-captioned matter involves a suit by a former employee of Brier & Thorn, Inc. (Brier & Thorn), an IT risk management firm. See Raap v. Brier & Thorn, Inc., United States District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, Case No. 2:16-cv-01690-JPS, Compl. (d/e 1) (alleging a Title VII claim and pendent state law claims for quantum meruit and unjust enrichment). Plaintiff alleges that Brier & Thorn terminated him because of his Christian faith, for sharing his Christian faith with others on his personal Facebook page, and for openly discussing his faith with business associates. A motion for a protective order barring non-party subpoenas filed by Brier & Thorn is pending in the Underlying Litigation. See id., Mot. (d/e 13) (filed May 17, 2017).

         On May 17, 2017, Bank of Springfield filed the Motion to Quash at issue herein. Plaintiff has not filed a response. Therefore, the Court presumes Plaintiff has no objection to the motion. CDIL-LR 7.1(B)(2) (“If no response is timely filed, the presiding judge will presume there is no opposition to the motion and may rule without further notice to the parties.”).

         II. THE MOTION TO QUASH

         The Motion to Quash contains the following allegations, supported by the affidavit of Lynn P. Bandy, the Senior Vice President and Chief Operations Officer of Bank of Springfield. See Motion, Bandy Aff., Ex. 2 (d/e 1).

         Bank of Springfield is an Illinois banking institution with its principal place of business in Springfield, Illinois. Bandy Aff. ¶ 2. Bank of Springfield does not regularly transact business within 100 miles of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where the Underlying Litigation is pending, or within 100 miles of Madison, Wisconsin, where compliance is commanded by the subpoena. Id. ¶ 3. Bank of Springfield's branch location closest to Wisconsin is in Springfield, Illinois. Id. ¶ 2.

         Bank of Springfield contracted with the defendant in the Underlying Lawsuit, Brier & Thorn, a San Diego, California, based company. Id. ¶ 4. Under the contract, Brier & Thorn provided annual penetration testing of Bank of Springfield's externally-facing internet servers and internal network to identify vulnerabilities in the environment that could be exploited by threats from the Internet and from inside the network. Id. ¶ 4. Bank of Springfield contends that the broad nature of the documents sought by the subpoena includes certain protected matter, including the confidential results of the testing and other protected bank information, as well as the correspondence related to said testing and results. Id. ¶ 5.

         Bank of Springfield requests that the Court quash the subpoena because it requires disclosure of documents more than 100 miles from where Bank of Springfield is located and regularly transacts business. Bank of Springfield further requests that the Court quash the subpoena because the subpoena is unduly burdensome. Bank of Springfield points out that the dispute between Plaintiff and Defendant is based on an employment dispute, such that the results of Bank of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.