Denial of Motions to Quash SubpoenasTo Enforce $30.1 Million Award Explained Universitas Education v. Nova Group, 11 Civ. 1590 (Jan. 4)

New York Law Journal

   |0 Comments

Universitas's $30.1 million arbitral award against Nova Group has been confirmed. Nova has neither paid judgment, nor posted bond. The funds at issue—insurance proceeds in Nova's possession—were held for Universitas' benefit in the Charter Oak Welfare Benefit Plan (Charter Oak Trust), for which Nova was fiduciary, sponsor and trustee. Universitas undertook discovery in aid of execution. The court denied motions to quash its subpoenas. In addition to finding a protective order motion by a principal of the law firm representing Nova in its arbitration to be without merit, the court denied a quash motion by Trudeau, the president of the firm administering the Charter Oak Trust. Given his trust involvement Trudeau should know about its finances, and his testimony is reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of Nova's and Charter Oak Trust's assets. The court also found it doubtful whether Nova had standing to seek to quash subpoenas on the behalf of certain nonparty entities. Other than baldly stating that the subpoenas sought documents that were "private, confidential, and commercially sensitive" Nova made no attempt to establish any proprietary or other confidentiality related interest it may have in the requested documents.

Universitas Education v. Nova Group, 11 Civ. 1590 (Jan. 4)

ADDITIONAL TOPICS

***ADD items below to practicearea, then delete***

Alternative Dispute Resolution

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202585802565

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.