In Solow v. Aspect Resources, LLC, 2007 WL 3256944 (Del. Ch., Oct. 30, 2007), read opinion here, the Chancery Court granted a motion to compel a third-party to comply with a subpoena to produce documents related to the litigation that it was not (yet) a party in. This letter opinion is a treasure trove of sorts for practical application of several rules applicable to third-party discovery. For example, the court not only grants the motion to compel as seeking allowable discovery under Rule 26(b)(1), in light of no undue burden and based on the reasonable scope of the request, but it also refuses to order the party seeking discovery to pay more than copying and shipping costs in light of the responding party failing to establish that it would incur "significant expenses" as required under Rule 45(c)(2)(b).
Lastly, the court refuses to order costs and fees resulting from the need to file a motion, finding that the opposition to the motion was "neither vexatious nor frivolous" and that it was "substantially justified".