Short answer. No, it must meet a real standard. A subpoena duces tecum must reasonably describe the books, documents, or things being demanded, and that description must appear, on its face, relevant to the court — an unbounded or clearly irrelevant demand simply does not satisfy this requirement.
What the law says
A subpoena shall state the name of the court and the title of the action or investigation, shall be directed to the person whose attendance is required, and in the case of a subpoena duces tecum, it shall also contain a reasonable description of the books, documents or things demanded which must appear to the court prima facie relevant.
Rule 21, Section 3 — Form and contents. Read the full provision →
The baseline requirements for any subpoena
Every subpoena, regardless of type, must state the name of the court and the title of the action or investigation involved, and it must be clearly directed to the specific person whose attendance is actually required. These basic identifying elements apply across the board, regardless of whether the particular subpoena is an ordinary one or instead a subpoena duces tecum demanding documents as well.
The added requirement for a subpoena duces tecum
Where the subpoena at issue is specifically one duces tecum — meaning it demands the production of documents or things in addition to attendance — it must also contain a reasonable description of the books, documents, or things actually being demanded from the recipient. A description that is vague, overly broad, or essentially open-ended would clearly fail to satisfy this particular additional requirement under the rule, since the recipient and the court both need to be able to tell precisely what is being asked for.
The prima facie relevance standard
That required description must further appear to the court prima facie relevant to the underlying matter. This ties the entire demand directly to some actual, demonstrable connection with the case or investigation currently at hand, rather than allowing a party to use a subpoena duces tecum as an open-ended fishing expedition for documents whose genuine relevance is not readily apparent on its face.
Why both requirements work together
Reasonable description and prima facie relevance work together and serve genuinely related purposes here: the description requirement lets both the recipient and the court know precisely what is actually being demanded from them, while the separate relevance requirement ensures that whatever is demanded is truly connected to the matter being heard, keeping subpoenas duces tecum properly focused rather than left entirely unbounded in scope. A party who receives a subpoena duces tecum failing either standard has grounds to object to or move to quash it.
Related provisions
- Rule 21, Section 3 — Form and contents
- Rule 21, Section 2 — By whom issued
- Rule 21, Section 4 — Quashing a subpoena