Mom's AT&T Cell Records Can't Be Subpoenaed

Bloomberg Law’s combination of innovative analytics, research tools and practical guidance provides you with everything you need to be a successful litigator.

Oct. 30 — The cell phone records of the mother of a woman claiming her employer violated the Civil Rights Act won't be released because the subpoena that sought them was overly broad, the Central District of Illinois held Oct. 29. Kari Jump moved to quash a subpoena directed at AT&T Communications. Her former employer, Montgomery County, sought Jump's mother's cell phone records in an effort to find evidence that Montgomery County could use to impeach Jump. In August 2015, the magistrate judge quashed the subpoena. Montgomery County appealed.

The court acknowledged that while a party generally lacks standing to quash a subpoena directed at a third-party, standing can be found under a claim of privilege to the information sought or if the production implicated a party's privacy interest. In addition, Jump's mother testified regarding the extent of her conversations with her daughter—therefore, the records were unlikely to impeach Jump's testimony.

The magistrate judge held that the disclosure of extensive personal information in order to obtain a minimal amount of potentially relevant information resulted in an undue burden.

According to the court, Jump did share information with her mother about alleged violations, but neither party provided the dates of those occurrences. Thus, the relevance of her mother's records “is at best uncertain.”

The court affirmed the magistrate's opinion.

District Judge Richard Mills wrote the opinion.

Kurtz Law Offices Ltd. in Hinsdale, Ill., represented Jump. O'Halloran Kosoff Geitner and Cook LLC in Northbrook, Ill., represented Montgomery County.

The full text of Jump v. Montgomery County, is available at

Request Litigation on Bloomberg Law