Legal - Google Subpoena from US attorney but for wrong person

cojack101

Hi all,

I got a subpoena for my google information. Apparently it is in relation to a divorce case in the United States for someone with the same name as mine. Which is a pretty unusual name. A google searched showed this guy getting divorced by the other party.

"Google has received a subpoena for information related to your Google account in a case entitled X v. X, Superior Court of California, County of San Diego. Reference number X.

To comply with the law, unless you provide us with a file-stamped motion to quash the subpoena (or other formal objection filed in court) via email at google-legal-support@google.com by 5pm Pacific Time on July 20, 2015, Google may provide responsive documents on this date."

It is genuine - not spam or a scan.

How hard can I sue this lawyer for filling a subpoena against me in error? I've to work a 12 hour shift starting in 2 hours and I've been up all night talking to the Superior Court of California - so as you can imagine I'm pretty pee'd off.

P.S. it was intimidating going through the switch board options, and option 3 is "death penalty appeals" :eek:

Thanks,

Peregrinus

Well, it's a question of California law, so boards.ie is not a great source of information - not that many Californian lawyers here.

But basic principles say you can't sue him at all. You can participate in the court proceedings for the purpose of objecting to the subpoena, and your objection will probably be withheld (or, more likely, when he gets your motion, the party who sought the subpoena may consent to the subpoena being revoked or struck down). You can ask the court to order the party concerned to pay your costs of objecting to the subpoena, but it is very, very unlikely that the court will do that - there are very few circumstances in which American courts award costs, and I'm afraid this is not one of them.

Will you be adversely affected in any material way if your Google data is disclosed to this guy? Presumably once he realises he's got the wrong bloke, he'll bin your stuff. If you feel you can live with this, well, live with this.

Otherwise, I'm afraid the only way to avoid this kind of thing is not to have a Google account. Only open accounts with internet companies who keep their data in jurisdictions where you consider the data protection laws provide you with the protection you need - if you can find any such jurisdiction.

dalta5billion

Terrible invasion of your privacy if it had gone through without you being notified, shows a disgraceful lack of investigation/fact-checking of what accounts actually pertain to the case.

Grab All Association

Go to the Google HQ in Dublin if you can and explain to them they have the wrong person. Also contact the Data Protection Commissioner in Portarlington for advice.

Mr. Incognito

Get the details for the appying attorney and ring them or a US attorney in the same state to represent you.

There could be some compo in it if they have handed over your info. Google could be at fault too.

Peregrinus

Google will not be at fault for complying with a subpoena.

And there is no point in telling Google that the you are not the person in whom the divorcing guy has an interest. You are the person named in the subpoena, which is all that concerns Google.

This is an issue between you and the guy who is seeking your information. You can file a motion in court objecting to the subpoena, and slog it out there. Realistically, you will need to hire a Californian attorney to do that. Or you can contact the divorcing guy's attorney, point out that you are not the bloke he is after, and ask him to withdraw the subpoena. He may or may not agree. If he doesn't, you are back to Plan A - file a motion of objection. Or you can decide that this is upsetting, but basically is not going to injure you in any material way, and you can let the process take its course.

(Of course, I have no idea whether it is going to injure you in any material way. That depends on whether the data Google holds about you is the kind of data that, if it got into the hands of a complete stranger, would be likely to be used against you.)

Manach

My understanding of EU data law is the country that the holds the most concentrated data, ie cloud storage, is the one whose law apply. That likely would be ireland. Hence as this is a very unreasonable and disportionate then best bet is to response to Google stating it is up to them to show the data must be released and not the OP and CC the data protection commissioner.

cojack101

OK I'm not seriously looking for money - I was tired and angry and having a bit of a rant.

I'm getting in touch with the divorce attorney when they open at 4.30pm GMT and will talk it out with them. Someone must have made a typo on the email address in either the attorneys office or the court, or google.

To be honest I'm shocked, if they dont play ball the only other option I have to protect my privacy is to pour money into another Californian Attorney.

I can't believe some attorney on the other side of the world can subpoena my private information like that and I am powerless to stop them. The chars in an email address are as unique as a barcode.. I am gob smacked that a Judge in a court room at Californian Superior Court put a signature on the bottom of a page that has my emaill on it - all on the word of some lawyer with no other checks.

ColinJennings

Californian judges are elected. Many of whom are unopposed.

http://ballotpedia.org/California_judicial_elections,_2014

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

cojack101

Chris___ wrote: »

Go to the Google HQ in Dublin if you can and explain to them they have the wrong person. Also contact the Data Protection Commissioner in Portarlington for advice.

The guy in the Data Protection Commissioner's office answering the phone was very nice. He said it falls under Californian Data Protection Commissioner's office not the Irish one as that is where the action is happening.

He said someone in the US court system / attorney's office is going to end up being pretty
embarrassed about this!

Tom Young

There are rules for such evidence and principles of comity that parties usually adhere to.

Query it with the originator. Sometimes US Cos forget the EU is outside the U.S. No, seriously.

Johnboy1951

Do the recent changes in Google's terms regarding privacy and data protection have any bearing?

I thought such information about an Irish person might be subject to Irish/EU law and not that of California.

billy few mates

Why not just ignore it...?
Why should you have to go to any hassle or expense because of their mistake...?
It's only a divorce case, not a criminal matter, they'll eventually realise it's not you, if they try contact you tell them you'll come over and explain it all in person once they send you the ticket (or tickets so you can bring the OH) and cover your accommodation and expenses.

mikom

Tom Young wrote: »

Query it with the originator. Sometimes US Cos forget the EU is outside the U.S. No, seriously.

Indeed...........

cojack101
Location: Dublin
Posts: 317
Adverts | Friends

Dublin (formerly, Amador and Dougherty's Station) is a suburban city of the East (San Francisco) Bay region of Alameda County, California, United States. Located along the north side of Interstate 580 at the intersection with Interstate 680, roughly 10 miles (16 km) east of Hayward, 6 miles (9.7 km) west of Livermore, directly north of Pleasanton, and 35 miles (56 km) north of San Jose, it was named after the city of Dublin in Ireland.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin,_California

P. Breathnach

cojack101 wrote: »

The guy in the Data Protection Commissioner's office answering the phone was very nice. He said it falls under Californian Data Protection Commissioner's office not the Irish one as that is where the action is happening....

I wonder about this. Do you have any idea where your data is held?

billy few mates

How do you know it isn't you...? Have you ever been to Vegas...? Maybe you don't remember what happened...?

Even Homer Simpson and Ned Flanders ended up getting hitched when they were there.
What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas normally but that doesn't include STIs and quickie marriages....

cojack101

OK all is resolved.

I spoke to the San Diego Superior Court who told me that registered US attorneys do not need the courts permission to issue a subpoena, they can issue them to whom they want when they want via a courts website.

The court did not seem to care that I had been subpoenaed in error, and informed to contact and retain an attorney stateside to file an injunction if I wanted it stopped. They did however very freely give me information about the case, and the parties involved. A testament to their emphasis on the importance of data protection I presume.

Eventually (after 3 voicemails and 2 emails) I spoke to the attorney who filed the subpoena and she informed me that google had refused to release the information she requested because she could not provide any more specific information about me apart from having the email address - for example: DOB, google account number etc. Thanks... Good Guy Google. :pac:

She also informed me that because my name is unusual, and they were aware that the first name and last name were used in the email address of her client's (soon to be) ex husband.. that they issued a "number" of subpoenas for different variations and would mine as much information as possible and with luck would find the needle in a hay stack they were looking for - for example:

firstname.lastname @ gmail.com
firstname-lastname @ gmail.com
firstname_lastname @ gmail.com

Ladies and gentlement.. that appears to be data protection in the United States. A royal rumble free for all.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

cojack101

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well in that case I'll write a letter to the divorcing couple.. who live at House Number XXXXX Paseo Candelero, Carlsbad, San Diego, California Zip Code 92009 - and tell them of how supprised I was to get that information. :pac:

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

cojack101

Fred Swanson I'm not disagreeing with you that its easy to get information in the states. I'm saying I'm amazed at how easy and freely available it is! Im just so used to Ireland being a closed shop.

If a Garda wants info on a phone number or email address as part of a relevant investigation - show a definite link then get it signed off by a Super and Judge

If an American wants info on a phone number or email address - there ya go.. have it.

P. Breathnach

I don't think that I am particularly precious about my privacy. I don't mind being in the telephone directory, nor do I worry when an addressed mailshot arrives where it seems likely that my address was taken from the electoral register.

But I dislike the idea that an American attorney can conduct a trawl and subpoena my data from Google without having to show reasonable justification, and without any court supervision.

billy few mates

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I don't think that I am particularly precious about my privacy. I don't mind being in the telephone directory, nor do I worry when an addressed mailshot arrives where it seems likely that my address was taken from the electoral register.

But I dislike the idea that an American attorney can conduct a trawl and subpoena my data from Google without having to show reasonable justification, and without any court supervision.

I agree, out of interest OP, how much do you reckon this has cost you in time and money to sort out...?

cojack101

@P. Breathnach - 100% agree with you on your privacy post.


@billy few mates - 20 euros in phone calls - about 3 hours in time total. An entire sleepless night on 30/06 into 01/06 - as I did not have any information about what or why my info was being subpoenaed.

All I knew was an attorney in the states had filed a court application to get info about me. I was worried some Saul Goodman was trying to sue me for a copyright infringement for something I posted on reddit, or that a corp was tracing I.P.'s from couchtuner.

Not that I stream any copyrighted media. I never have, nor ever would breach The Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998.

billy few mates

Me neither...

Tom Young

Believe it or not, there is no/limited court supervision over subpoenas in most common law countries. You present a precipae and the fee and the subpoena issues.

"Please turn up on X date and Y place and the sanction is contempt."

The remedy is to move to set aside such subpoenas by the person to whom they or it is directed, whether within the jurisdiction or abroad.

Tom

Greenmachine

Can't believe a subpoena was issued by email. The mind boggles. If the OP were in fact the named person how easy would it be for that email to go his junk mail folder.

Vojera

Greenmachine wrote: »

Can't believe a subpoena was issued by email. The mind boggles. If the OP were in fact the named person how easy would it be for that email to go his junk mail folder.

My understanding is that the subpoena was actually issued to Google. They just got in touch with the OP saying that they had received it and may have to release the information if he didn't respond.

P. Breathnach

Tom Young wrote: »

Believe it or not, there is no/limited court supervision over subpoenas in most common law countries. You present a precipae and the fee and the subpoena issues.

"Please turn up on X date and Y place and the sanction is contempt."

The remedy is to move to set aside such subpoenas by the person to whom they or it is directed, whether within the jurisdiction or abroad.

So, if you had a gripe against me and a vindictive attitude, you could persecute me with subpoenas and impose on me the trouble and cost of having them set aside?

Greenmachine

Vojera wrote: »

My understanding is that the subpoena was actually issued to Google. They just got in touch with the OP saying that they had received it and may have to release the information if he didn't respond.

What information do they have to release. His browsing history, his email contacts, his google+ profile? What if he had a different preferred browser like bing or mozilla?

Brian Lighthouse

"..if they dont play ball the only other option I have to protect my privacy is to pour money into another Californian Attorney.

I can't believe some attorney on the other side of the world can subpoena my private information like that and I am powerless to stop them."

I don't understand why you got so worried, they are a private company, why should you worry about what information you have already given them?
I don't know if you are aware of this, but, you have given any boards reader some - what I would consider - private information over the years: http://www.boards.ie/search/submit/?user=357022&sort=newest&date_to=&date_from=&query=*%3A*&page=1

Be careful online folks, nothing gets deleted

Vojera

Greenmachine wrote: »

What information do they have to release. His browsing history, his email contacts, his google+ profile? What if he had a different preferred browser like bing or mozilla?

Since it's a divorce case I assume they're looking for evidence of infidelity, so I'd say they'd go through his emails (he has a gmail account) to see if any contact was ever made. Google also has a lot of location information on you. Even if you use another browser, if you're signed into your google account on it it will still log any use of google sites, be they the search engine, youtube, picasa, etc.

Even if my internet use is perfectly innocuous, I still wouldn't want anyone else going through it for no good reason and without my permission, especially not on the basis of having the same name as someone 5000 miles away.

godtabh

mikom wrote: »

Indeed...........

cojack101
Location: Dublin
Posts: 317
Adverts | Friends

i was there yesterday

Tom Young

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So, if you had a gripe against me and a vindictive attitude, you could persecute me with subpoenas and impose on me the trouble and cost of having them set aside?

It's a witness summons within extant proceedings, so not quite.

Victor

Tom Young wrote: »

It's a witness summons within extant proceedings, so not quite.

But are fishing expeditions so willingly allowed?

Tom Young

Victor wrote: »

But are fishing expeditions so willingly allowed?

They aren't here, not sure about the U.S. Rules on non-party subpoenas but I'd suggest not. Usually non-party orders and subpoenas as only allowed when all avenues of party discovery have been exhausted.

Persons unknown and the interweb with its so called/thought anonymity complicates matters.

To stop fishing, the costs of the non-party are discharged by the party seeking the data or testimony to include expenses.