Eichenwald v. Rivello

321 F. Supp. 3d 562 · District Court, D. Maryland · 2018

Facts

Plaintiff Kurt Eichenwald sued Defendant John Rivello for causing a seizure by sending a strobe-light image via Twitter. During discovery, Plaintiff subpoenaed several third-parties for information related to a "Rivello Legal Defense Fund" and statements about the alleged assault. Defendant moved to quash these third-party subpoenas.

Procedural history

Plaintiff Kurt Eichenwald filed a lawsuit against Defendant John Rivello in November 2017. The Court initially stayed proceedings due to a related criminal case in Texas but later partially lifted the stay, allowing Plaintiff to begin third-party discovery. After the Court partially granted and denied a motion to dismiss by Defendant, Plaintiff subpoenaed several third-parties. Defendant then filed a motion for a protective order and/or to quash these third-party subpoenas, which is the subject of this opinion.

Issue

Does a defendant have standing to challenge third-party subpoenas when they do not claim a personal right, privilege, or proprietary interest in the information sought?

Holding

No, the court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the third-party subpoenas because he did not assert any personal right, privilege, or proprietary interest in the information sought. Therefore, the defendant's motion to quash was denied.

Rule

A party generally lacks standing to challenge a subpoena issued to a third-party unless they claim a personal right, privilege, or proprietary interest in the subpoenaed matter. The motion to quash should typically be made by the person from whom the documents are requested.

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed 2026-01-25. Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.