In re Lazaridis

Citations: 865 F. Supp. 2d 521; 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98592; 2011 WL 3859919Docket: Civil Action No. 10-29 (FLW)

Court: District Court, D. New Jersey; September 1, 2011; Federal District Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Respondent Bring Sean Home Foundation (BSHF) successfully moved to quash a subpoena duces tecum issued to it by Petitioner Emmanuel Lazaridis under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which allows federal courts to assist in evidence production for foreign tribunals. BSHF sought a protective order against the subpoena and requested monetary sanctions, which the court denied. The underlying case began on April 12, 2010, when Lazaridis filed an ex parte application for discovery and sought to proceed in forma pauperis, which was granted. The subpoena requested extensive documentation related to Lazaridis, specific user accounts on the BSHF website, documents related to the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, and various electronic logs concerning BSHF messages.

BSHF is a New Jersey-based non-profit focused on assisting victims of international child abduction and operates on a volunteer basis without active employees. Lazaridis claims to be involved in a Greek criminal prosecution for libel and slander against several U.S. citizens, arguing that the requested documents are essential to demonstrate harm to his reputation and to assist Greek authorities in determining appropriate damages and remedies. Lazaridis maintains that as a complainant, he has rights that allow him to aid in the investigation and prosecution of the charged individuals. The court granted BSHF's motion to quash the subpoena and issue a protective order, but it did not impose sanctions as requested by BSHF.

The Court granted Lazaridis's ex parte petition to serve a subpoena on BSHF, allowing service but reserving judgment on the subpoena's substance until objections from BSHF could be considered. BSHF subsequently filed a motion to quash the subpoena, claiming it is unduly burdensome under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, arguing that it constitutes harassment and annoyance. An undue burden is defined as a subpoena that is "unreasonable or oppressive," with courts evaluating several factors to determine reasonableness, including the requesting party's need, the litigation's importance, the relevance of the material, the breadth and time period of the request, and the burden on the subpoenaed party.

BSHF contends that Lazaridis lacks a legitimate need for the documents since much information is publicly accessible and the requested data cannot be presented in a readable format. BSHF asserts that its website hosts numerous searchable forums, but the underlying data stored in SQL format cannot be printed easily. Additionally, BSHF claims it retains error logs for only six months and routinely deletes other backup information, with emails deleted post-download and members using private email addresses. BSHF also seeks a protective order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to prevent Lazaridis from obtaining the requested information, asserting that it can demonstrate specific harms that warrant such an order.

Lazaridis has not demonstrated whether Greek authorities are aware of or support his request for documents related to the Greek Prosecution, which involves Ernie Allen and others for alleged defamation, not BSHF or its members. BSHF argues that the Subpoena serves only to harass and lacks legitimate legal purpose, citing numerous unrelated cases filed by Lazaridis in the U.S. BSHF contends that the significance of the Greek Prosecution is undermined by Lazaridis's attempts to challenge his fugitive status in the U.S. due to a warrant for his daughter's alleged abduction, claiming these actions were initiated from Greece to avoid U.S. jurisdiction. 

BSHF asserts that the requested documents are irrelevant to the Greek Prosecution and that the Subpoena is overly broad, seeking an extensive range of documents without specificity. It raises First Amendment concerns regarding the disclosure of anonymous posters' information, arguing that Lazaridis must demonstrate a compelling need for such information, which he has not done. Additionally, BSHF describes the request as unduly burdensome, estimating that it would require 70 to 80 hours of work to produce approximately 73,000 documents, which is impractical given its non-profit status and limited staffing. In contrast, Lazaridis argues that the documents are necessary for the Greek Prosecution to identify individuals influenced by the defamatory statements.

Lazaridis argues that the information he requests is essential for assessing damages related to the Greek Prosecution and contends that the Court lacks the authority to evaluate the merits of that underlying action. He refutes BSHF’s claim that the Subpoena is excessively burdensome, clarifying that his request involves only 15 to 20 documents rather than 73,000, and that there are no time constraints since BSHF was established in 2009. He adds that the requested database can be provided in a non-readable format because the necessary SQL software is publicly accessible. Lazaridis believes that some requested documents are private and not publicly available.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), a federal district court may order document production for use in foreign or international tribunal proceedings. The court must assess whether the discovery request meets three criteria: the person resides in the district, the discovery is for a foreign tribunal, and the application is made by an interested party. The court may also evaluate four discretionary factors, including the participant status of the person from whom discovery is sought, the nature of the foreign tribunal, the potential circumvention of foreign proof gathering restrictions, and whether the subpoena is unduly burdensome.

Lazaridis initially bore the burden of proof to justify the issuance of the Subpoena but now contends that BSHF must demonstrate grounds for quashing it. However, the Court finds that BSHF has substantiated that the Subpoena is unreasonable and burdensome. The Court notes Lazaridis has provided minimal factual support regarding the significance of the Greek Prosecution and has not adequately connected the requested information's relevance to it, relying instead on vague assertions about his procedural rights. Furthermore, the Court references a prior case where it was established that Greek criminal proceedings are managed by the public prosecutor, who can obtain documents from U.S. entities through established legal mechanisms, countering Lazaridis's claims.

A private citizen, such as Lazaridis, cannot compel a public investigator to gather evidence on behalf of a criminal court, nor can he obtain evidence through the governing treaty between the United States and Greece. The record indicates that neither the TMMCA nor the prosecutor has sought the information Lazaridis requests, despite their ability to do so. Lazaridis's justification for needing the documents is ambiguous, with suggestions that he may seek them for purposes unrelated to the Greek prosecution, as he has other pending cases where the information might be relevant. The Court is troubled by Lazaridis's inconsistent claims regarding the relevance of the information, raising doubts about his actual need for it.

The request for documents is extensive and lacks specificity, as it imposes a significant burden on BSHF, which cannot easily produce the requested information in a readable format. Although Lazaridis claims he seeks only a small number of messages, he also suggests the possibility of producing an entire database, which would still burden BSHF to provide unreadable data. There is evidence that Lazaridis could obtain the information from other sources, as he has identified some BSHF users and served subpoenas on them.

Additionally, BSHF has raised concerns about First Amendment implications related to the disclosure of private user information. BSHF has a privacy policy safeguarding member information, and courts have recognized that anonymous internet speakers have First Amendment protections. Disclosure of such information requires a compelling need that outweighs these protections, as established in prior case law.

The Court concludes that a BSHF poster's privacy should be safeguarded unless a compelling need is demonstrated, which Lazaridis has failed to do. The case involves alleged defamation by Mr. Allen, not BSHF, and the Court finds the burden on BSHF outweighs any lack of demonstrated need or relevance for the information sought, especially considering First Amendment implications. Consequently, BSHF's motion to quash the Subpoena is granted. Although BSHF also sought sanctions against Lazaridis for harassment, this issue was not adequately briefed, and BSHF did not provide sufficient grounds for sanctions; thus, that request is denied. The Court also notes that, while BSHF argues the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine may prevent Lazaridis from obtaining the documents, the determination to quash the Subpoena under Rule 45 makes it unnecessary to address Lazaridis's status under the Doctrine. The order was issued on September 1, 2011.