From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

IN RE REQUEST OF ORIC

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois
Dec 23, 2004
04 C 7300 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 23, 2004)

Opinion

04 C 7300.

December 23, 2004


Attorneys for Naser Oric, the defendant in a case pending before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), request that I issue a subpoena requiring Sherri Fink, M.D., a physician and author, to produce documents and materials used in the preparation of her book War Hospital. The petition is made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a); Petitioners intend to use the materials in developing Oric's defense before the ICTY. Fink contests this court's jurisdiction to issue the subpoena, challenging the validity of "tag" jurisdiction under § 1782. Fink also asserts a "journalist's privilege," though it is unclear whether she purports to base that privilege in the somewhat tenuous federal common law reporter's privilege or a privilege based on state law. Fink's attorney has requested an opportunity to submit briefing on this issue if I think it necessary, which I do.

In the alternative, Fink requests dismissal for improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 or transfer of venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). While Fink's motion for transfer to the Southern District of New York may have merit, I cannot reach that issue until I have determined that the jurisdiction of this court is proper.

Whether this court has jurisdiction to issue the subpoena pursuant to § 1782 depends in part on whether any relevant privilege is applicable to Fink. See Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 124 S. Ct. 2466, 2480 (2004) ("[Section] 1782 expressly shields privileged material") (citing S. Rep. No. 1580, 88th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 9 (1964), "[N]o person shall be required under the provisions of [§ 1782] to produce any evidence in violation of an applicable privilege"). However, the Seventh Circuit strictly limited the application of any "reporter's privilege" in a similar case, noting that the First Amendment has little bearing when information demanded under § 1782(a) does not come from a confidential source. McKevitt v. Pallasch, 339 F.3d 530, 533 (7th Cir. 2003) (upholding district court order pursuant to § 1782 that required production of reporters' tape recordings). Therefore, I will enter and stay Oric's request for a brief period in order to allow Fink to submit briefing on the issues of privilege and confidentiality. Given the time-sensitive nature of Oric's request, Fink is ordered to submit a response brief to this court no later than January 14, 2005. Petitioners will have until January 21, 2005 to submit their reply.


Summaries of

IN RE REQUEST OF ORIC

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois
Dec 23, 2004
04 C 7300 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 23, 2004)
Case details for

IN RE REQUEST OF ORIC

Case Details

Full title:In re Request of Naser Oric

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Illinois

Date published: Dec 23, 2004

Citations

04 C 7300 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 23, 2004)