|
An Illinois federal district court has refused to examine the propriety of an arbitration panel's subpoena for documents from a non-party, finding the issues raised by the non-party to be fully arbitrable.
In Federal Insurance Co. v. Law Offices of Edward T. Joyce, P.C., No. 08 C 0431, 2008 WL 4348604 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 13, 2008), Federal sought to enforce a discovery subpoena issued during an arbitration proceeding against Joyce, a non-party to the proceedings. Joyce objected to the subpoena, alleging that it was overbroad, sought irrelevant materials, and included privileged documents in its scope. Joyce also argued that Federal was estopped from discovery due to delay.
The Court found all of Joyce's objections were arbitrable issues that should be raised with the arbitration panel and not with a court in the first instance. See, e.g., In re Sec. Life Ins. Co. of Am., 228 F.3d 865, 871 (8th Cir. 2000) (allowing a district court to pass judgment on a panel's subpoena is "antithetical to the well-recognized federal policy favoring arbitration, and compromises the panel's presumed expertise in the matter at hand").
Because Joyce had raised no non-arbitrable objections with the arbitration panel to date, the Court granted enforcement of the subpoena, but allowed Joyce to move to quash the subpoena with the panel within 30 days if it so desired.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|