govinfo:USCOURTS-moed-4_16-cv-01631-16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI 
EASTERN DIVISION 
PHYLLIS SCHLAFL Y REVOCABLE TRUST 
et al., 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
Plaintiffs, 
V. 
ANNE CORI, et al., 
Defendants. 
Case No. 4:16-CV-01631 JAR 
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Eagle Forum's motion to quash a subpoena 
directed to nonparty HostMonster. (Doc. No. 243). Plaintiff filed a response on June 16, 2022. 
Defendant has not filed a reply and the time to do so has passed. For the reasons set forth below, 
the motion will be denied without prejudice. 
On May 18, 2022, Plaintiffs emailed a subpoena to HostMonster seeking production of 
information related to the subscriber accounts for eagleforum.info and eagleforum.org. 
HostMonster confirmed receipt of the subpoena later that day. Plaintiffs notified counsel for 
Defendant of the subpoena, as well as HostMonster' s initial response on May 19. Defendant asks 
the Court to quash the subpoena because Plaintiffs failed to notify them prior to serving it on 
HostMonster. 
Eastern District Local Rule 3.04(A) provides with respect to motions concerning 
discovery and disclosure: 
The Court will not consider any motion relating to discovery and disclosure 
unless it contains a statement that movant's counsel has conferred in person or by 
telephone with the opposing counsel in good faith or has made reasonable efforts 
to do so, but that after sincere efforts to resolve their dispute, counsel are unable 
to reach an accord. This statement also shall recite the date, time and manner of 
1 
Case: 4:16-cv-01631-RWS     Doc. #:  247     Filed: 07/06/22     Page: 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>
such conference, and the names of the individuals participating therein, or shall 
state with specificity the efforts made to confer with opposing counsel. 
E.D. Mo. L.R. 3.04(A). 
The instant motion concerns discovery but is silent as to any good-faith effort to resolve 
this matter without Court involvement. Local Rule 3.04(A) requires a conference in person or by 
telephone, along with specific details concerning the conference, or a statement of the reasonable 
efforts made to confer in person or by telephone. Defendant's motion contains no statement that 
their counsel has conferred with opposing counsel in person or by telephone regarding the 
discovery dispute at issue, much less provide the details required by Local Rule 3.04(A). 
Accordingly, 
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Quash [243] is DENIED 
without prejudice. 
Dated this 6th day of July, 2022. 
UN~D STATEs DISTRICT JUDGE 
JO~ROSS 
2 
Case: 4:16-cv-01631-RWS     Doc. #:  247     Filed: 07/06/22     Page: 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight