Alberts, Trustee v. Galen Hospital Illinois, Inc. et al

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
In re
GREATER SOUTHEAST COMMUNITY
HOSPITAL CORPORATION, I, et
al.,
Debtors.
____________________________
SAM J. ALBERTS, TRUSTEE FOR
THE DCHC LIQUIDATING TRUST,
Plaintiff,
v.
HCA INC., et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 02-02250
(Chapter 11)
(Jointly Administered)
Adversary Proceeding No.
04-10366
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO QUASH FILED BY KUTAK ROCK LLP
This order is issued pursuant to the court's oral ruling of
this date on the Motion to Quash filed by Kutak Rock LLP. In
that ruling, the court expressed its preliminary view that
expenses ought not be awarded in light of the obligation of an
attorney, upon termination of the representation of a client, to
turn over to the client all papers relating to that
The order below is hereby signed.
Signed: June 02, 2006.
_____________________________
S. Martin Teel, Jr.
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 04-10366 Doc 156 Filed 06/02/06 Entered 06/02/06 16:28:36 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 2

2	O:\JUDGTEMP\Alberts vs HCA Order re Kutak Rock Motion to Quash.wpd
representation. The plaintiff Alberts made clear on the record
today his desire that Kutak Rock LLP produce to him all of the
client files Kutak Rock LLP possesses relating to the debtors.
Kutak Rock LLP could elect to comply with its obligation to honor
that request and to produce to Alberts all of the client files
relating to the debtors. That would obviate any expense in
searching through the client files for only the items
specifically addressed by the subpoena. Accordingly, Kutak Rock
LLP ought not be reimbursed for any expense incurred by reason of
Kutak Rock LLP's decision not to produce the entire client files
to which the plaintiff is entitled. It is thus
ORDERED that the Motion to Quash Subpoena Directed to Kutak
Rock LLP (Docket Entry No. 146) is DENIED. It is further
ORDERED that by June 12, 2006, Kutak Rock LLP shall produce
to the plaintiff any and all documents responsive to the third-
party subpoena issued by the plaintiff. It is further
ORDERED that the request to condition compliance with the
subpoena on reimbursement of expenses of production is DENIED
without prejudice to renewal of a request for reimbursement of
such expenses by way of a motion, filed after production is
completed, that addresses the court's preliminary view on that
issue.
[Signed and dated above.]
Copies to: All counsel of record for the parties; and Jeffrey A.
Wadsworth, Esq. [counsel for Kutak Rock, LLP].
Case 04-10366 Doc 156 Filed 06/02/06 Entered 06/02/06 16:28:36 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 2