The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2022

12 O.S. §2004.1. With respect to the duties of a person in Oklahoma served with such a subpoena, the UIDDA again refers us to 12 O.S. §2004.1, this time expressly incor porating the language found in 12 O.S. §2004.1(D). A party resist ing the newly-issued Oklahoma subpoena may, upon service of the

uniform act, consideration must be given to the need to promote uniformity of the law with respect to its subject matter among states that enact it.” This provision seems to indicate that interpretation of the UIDDA by courts in Oklahoma should be undertaken with an eye toward coherence with foreign

business trust, estate, trust, part nership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, public corporation, government, or gov ernmental subdivision, agency or instrumentality, or any other legal or commercial entity.” 9 Section 12 O.S. §3252 sets forth the procedure whereby a foreign subpoena is honored in Oklahoma. Specifically, “a party must submit a foreign subpoena to a clerk of court in the county in which discovery is sought” in Oklahoma. 10 The UIDDA provides that the clerk, upon receipt of the foreign subpoena, “in accordance with that court’s procedure, shall promptly issue a subpoena for ser vice upon the person to which the foreign subpoena is directed.” 11 Note the mandatory language whereby the court clerk is com manded to promptly issue an Oklahoma subpoena, with discre tion only afforded to the extent the clerk is acting “in accordance with that court’s procedure.” Section 12 O.S. §3252(C)(1-2) provides the Oklahoma subpoena must “incor porate the terms used in the foreign subpoena; and contain or be accom panied by the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all counsel of record in the proceeding with which the subpoena related and of any party not represented by coun sel.” The requirement that counsel for parties to the case be identi fied can be easily satisfied via the foreign attorney’s signature block and certificate of service. Notably, a request by a foreign attorney for issuance of an Oklahoma subpoena pursuant to the UIDDA “does not constitute an appearance in the courts of [Oklahoma].” 12 Once an Oklahoma subpoena is issued containing provisions consistent with those found in the foreign subpoena, 12 O.S. §3253 states the Oklahoma subpoena must be served in accordance with

same pursuant to Oklahoma law, apply to the court that issued the subpoena for a protective order or to quash or modify the subpoena. 13 Similarly, the party serving the subpoena may also apply to the same court to enforce the sub poena. 14 Section 3255 makes clear that litigation regarding the sub poena is governed by the “rules or statutes of this state,” and requests to enforce, quash or modify the subpoena must be “submitted in the county in which discovery is to be conducted.” Here again, the UIDDA tracks Rule 45, which likewise provides that subpoena disputes be resolved in the jurisdiction where discovery is sought. 15 Further underscoring the UIDDA’s emphasis on consis tent nationwide subpoena pro cedures, 12 O.S. §3256 provides, “In applying and construing this

jurisdiction decisional law. Similarly, it would appear that pur suant to this provision, foreign case law should be treated as instructive when construing the UIDDA. Prior to Oklahoma’s adoption of the UIDDA, this author used versions of the UIDDA adopted in other jurisdictions to issue document subpoenas. In terms of practical advice for conducting discovery in a foreign jurisdiction pursuant to the UIDDA, the first task should be to locate the ver sion of the UIDDA adopted in the foreign jurisdiction where discov ery is to be had. As the UIDDA is a uniform law, the version adopted in such a jurisdiction should be similar to 12 O.S. §3250, et seq. However, some variations may exist, and best practices dictate starting with the language of the statute in the state where

8 | AUGUST 2022

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL