This document is a "Notice of Motion and Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum" filed by a defendant in a civil case. The defendant argues that the plaintiff's subpoena of the defendant's landlord should be quashed for two reasons: 1) the subpoena was not properly served on the defendant as required by law; and 2) the subpoena lacked the necessary affidavit showing good cause for the requested documents as required by law. The defendant believes the subpoena is an abuse of process intended to interfere with the landlord-tenant relationship rather than obtain legitimate discovery.

1. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 1-
[Attorney’s Name Redacted]
[Attorney’s Business Address Redacted]
[City, State Zip Code Redacted
[Phone Redacted]
[Email Redacted]
COURT NAME [REDACTED]
JURISDICTION [REDACTED]
[PLAINTIFF’S NAME REDACTED],
Plaintiff,
vs.
[DEFENDANT’S NAME REDACTED],
DOES 1 THRU 25 INCLUSIVE
Defendant
Case No.: [REDACTED]
NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION TO QUASH DEPOSITION OF
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM, AND
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
AUTHORITIES, AND DECLARATION OF
[NAME REDACTED]
DATE: [REDACTED]
TIME: [REDACTED]
DEPT: [REDACTED]
TO PLAINTIFF AND ITS COUNSEL:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on [DATE REDACTED] at 1:30 PM in Department 00A of
this Court [or whichever courtroom to which this matter is assigned], Defendant will and does
hereby move the Court to quash the subpoena duces tecum, on grounds of failure to effectuate
proper service of process, under California Code of Civil Procedure § 1987.1, In addition,

2. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 2-
Plaintiff’s subpoena is an abuse of discovery, because it seeks to maliciously malign Defendant
by disrupting her current landlord/tenant relationship .
This motion is based upon the following points and authorities, and Declaration of
[NAME REDACTED].
DEFENDANT DOES NOT STIPULATE TO A COMMISSIONER OR JUDGE PRO
TEM participating in any aspect of this matter [Cal. Const. Art. 6 § 21], and will submit on the
papers absent actual appearance. [CRC § 3.1304(c)].
______________________________
[DEFENDANT’S NAME REDACTED]
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Introduction
A money judgment was obtained in Plaintiff’s favor for which Plaintiff has issued a
subpoena duces tecum to Defendant’s current landlord. However, Plaintiff failure to follow
California Code of Civil Procedure to effectuate proper service of process constitutes an abuse
process, discovery and remedy.
1. Service of Subpoena Duces Tecum was not by Personal Service.
Plaintiff has subpoenaed personal records as defined in California Code of Civil
Procedure (CCP) § 1985.3(a)(1), which [must] be personally served on Defendant or served by
mail, as required by CCP § 1985.3(c)(1) which states in part:

3. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 3-
“. . . serve or cause to be served upon the witness a proof of personal service or of
service by mail attesting to compliance with subdivision (b).”
And continues,
“(b) Prior to the date called for in the subpoena duces tecum for the production of
personal records, the subpoenaing party shall serve or cause to be served on the
consumer whose records are being sought a copy of the subpoena duces tecum, of
the affidavit supporting the issuance of the subpoena, if any, and of the notice
described in subdivision (c), and proof of service as indicated in paragraph (1) of
subdivision (c).”
CCP § 1985.3(b) requires proof of service upon deponent be named in the
document. In the case at hand, the entry for proof of service upon the deponent was left
blank, indicating that there was no such service, and fails to comply with CCP § 1985(b),
even if the service on the deponent had been properly accomplished. Plaintiff has failed
to comply with the prerequisites of due process and service of process of the subpoena
duces tecum. Therefore, the entire subpoena must be quashed. CCP §§ 1985.3(g) and
1987.1.
Defendant requests this Court quash the Plaintiff’s subpoena duces tecum.
2. Service of the Subpoena Duces Tecum lacked the required affidavit.
Pursuant to CCP § 1985(b) “Where a subpoena duces tecum is served, it must be
accompanied by an affidavit showing good cause for the production of the matters
and things described in the subpoena, specifying the exact matters or things
desired to be produced, setting forth in full detail the materiality thereof to the
issues involved in the case, and stating that the witness has the desired matters or
things in his or her possession or under his or her control.”
The subject subpoena contains no such affidavit showing good cause for the
production of the matters, nor does it show things described specifying the exact matters

4. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 4-
or things desired to be produced, nor does it set forth in full detail the materiality thereof
to the issues involved in the case, nor does it set forth that the witness has the desire
matters or things in his or her possession or under his or her control.”
Plaintiff’s failure to set forth good cause was sought for vengeance. Plaintiff’s
attempt to contact Defendant’s current landlord was motivated by retaliation, packaged in
the guise of a subpoena for discovery. Plaintiff’s subpoena is an attempt to insinuate that
Defendant should be evicted or distrusted under the current landlord/tenant lease.
Plaintiff’s retaliatory motivation is based on the fact that Defendant for asserted her rights
to contact government officials and agencies in the subject action. Plaintiff’s subpoena
amounts to tortious interference with contract and an abuse of process. Without the
requisite affidavit, the Plaintiff’s subpoena duces tecum fails to comply with the
aforementioned statute and must be quashed in its entirety.
For all the foregoing reasons, Defendant requests this Court quash the Plaintiff’s
subpoena duces tecum quashed.
Respectively submitted,
____________________________
[Attorney’s Name Redacted]

5. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 5-
DECLARATION OF [DECLARANT’S NAME REDACTED]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I, [Declarant’s name redacted], state:
I am a Defendant in this action and make this declaration of my own personal
knowledge.
Attached hereto is the Plaintiff’s subpoena duces tecum purportedly served upon
my current landlord, [Landlord’s Name Redacted]. The proof of service which I received
is blank, and I have reason to believe that the one served upon [Landlord’s Name
Redacted] is also blank. In addition, Plaintiff failed to attach an affidavit showing good
cause for serving the subpoena on [Landlord’s Name Redacted].
Plaintiff’s service of the subpoena of my current landlord fails to state any good
cause, moreover Plaintiff failed to attach the requisite affidavit delineating good cause.
Landlord is not an income source for myself, nor does he hold any assets that could be
used to satisfy a judgment in Plaintiff’s favor. The transparent reason for serving the
subpoena on my current landlord is to tortuously interfere with my current
landlord/tenant relationship, seeking to exact unwarranted distrust between myself and
Landlord. Plaintiff’s continued harassment is motivated by vengeance for my asserting
my rights to the proper government authorities and agencies. The subpoena duces tecum
is an abuse of process, intended to harass and malign.

6. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- 6-
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
EXECUTED THIS ____ DAY OF __________, ______ AT [CITY NAME
REDACTED], CALIFORNIA.
_________________________________
[DEFENDANT’S NAME REDACTED]
_____________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF [NAME REDACTED]
I am employed in the County of [NAME REDACTED] at [ADDRESS REDACTED].
I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action.
On [DATE REDACTED], I served the document attached hereto on the opposing
party(s) in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage
thereon fully prepaid in the United States mail at [CITY NAME REDACTED], California,
addressed to:
[ATTORNEY’S NAME AND ADDRESS REDACTED]
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
is true and correct. Executed on [DATE REDACTED] at [CITY NAME REDACTED],
California.
___________________________________
[NAME AND SIGNATURE REDACTED]