Also known as: particularities of breadth · particularity requirement · overbreadth
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A requirement applied to subpoenas that the scope of documents or information demanded must not harass or oppress the recipient to the point of causing unreasonable business detriment. Courts assess this prong by weighing the volume, time span, and operational impact of compliance against the needs of the investigation.
Pacific Bank received a grand jury subpoena demanding every customer transaction record for the past eight years. The bank showed that compliance would require hiring twenty additional staff and shutting down normal operations for weeks. The court quashed the subpoena because its breadth imposed unreasonable business detriment without sufficient justification tied to the investigation.
Premier Manufacturing was served with a subpoena limited to invoices and shipping logs for three specific product lines over eighteen months. The company demonstrated that the requested records were readily accessible and that production would require only modest staff time. The court upheld the subpoena because its limited breadth avoided any unreasonable business detriment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The particularity requirement has two prongs. Particularity of description ensures the recipient knows exactly what to produce. Particularity of breadth ensures the demand does not harass or oppress the recipient to the point of unreasonable business detriment.
Supporting sources
Courts focus on the degree of burden imposed by production. They consider the volume of records, the time period covered, and whether compliance would cause unreasonable detriment to the recipient's business operations.
Supporting sources
Ambiguities more commonly implicate the description prong. Courts treat the breadth prong as concerned with overall burden and harassment rather than notice of what is sought.
Supporting sources