Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
In this removed personal-injury action, plaintiff Tadael Melka noticed the deposition of defendant Take 5 Properties SPV LLC’s corporate representative for July 15, 2026. Take 5 moved to quash the notice, arguing that Melka had set the date unilaterally.
Take 5 relied on the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Melka responded that those rules do not govern procedure in federal court and maintained that he had repeatedly attempted to coordinate a mutually agreeable deposition date.
The Court’s Holding
The court denied Take 5’s motion to quash. It explained that a party seeking to quash a deposition bears a heavy burden to demonstrate good cause and a specific need for protection.
Take 5 did not meet that burden. Its reliance on Texas procedural rules was unavailing because federal courts sitting in diversity apply federal procedural rules, and Take 5 offered no additional reason why the deposition notice should be quashed.
Key Takeaways
- A party moving to quash a deposition must establish good cause and a specific need for protection.
- Texas procedural rules do not govern deposition procedure in a federal diversity action.
- An objection that a deposition was scheduled unilaterally, without further supporting grounds under federal procedure, did not justify quashing the notice.
Why It Matters
The ruling underscores that litigants in removed diversity cases must ground discovery objections in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Reliance solely on state procedural requirements will not satisfy the movant’s burden to show good cause for quashing a deposition.