Privacy at least I thought so


I have been separated since late Dec 2008. My STBX is fighting over child custody meaning he wants the kids each other week although his travel schedule never allows him to be home and when we were together he had nothing to do with them. I had them the entire time. The kids do not want to go.
All of a sudden his lawyer has subpoenaed the txt msg’s from my cell phone and my daughter cell phone. Both phones I bought after we separated and the phone numbers are new. Found out the old phones he was having all txt’s redirected so he could read all of the txt’s so we had to both get new phones.
How does he have any right to see all of who I have txt anything to which includes my work, my lawyer and many others that he has no right to view since we are separated? What happened to privacy and how can someone just ask for this info and get it. He has no right to see any txt I have sent or received since we separated and since I bought the phone. What is wrong with this and can it be stopped due to privacy and the fact that we are separated.


Discovery allows a party to have access to materials and information that may lead to relevant evidence. He does have the right to request these records, however if they are not relevant to the issue being litigated they will not be admissible in court.


He just wanted to know who I am talking to and what I am doing. He has always been very very controlling and before leaving had installed keylogging software on my work computer that also allowed him to view everything. So he has the right to view the conversations I have had to my lawyer about this case and he gets to read all of it no matter what. Boy what a system


Who decides what is relevant evidence ? It cant be him since again he just wants to know so he can then in turn create more issues for me as he has already done with my life since I asked him to leave


If the evidence is not relevant your attorney objects at trial and the judge decides whether to admit the evidence or not.


I believe the point may be that she is objecting that he even has the right to receive the evidence in the first place… Whether it is deemed relevent in front of a judge later or not, the material has already been turned over and viewed by the STBX, who can then use it anyway they want.

I see the point here… Is there not a way to dispute a subpoena for evidence without actually providing the information requested? Or does the issuance of a subpoena already assume that a judge has looked at it and decided that yes, this is relevant and therefore must be provided immediately.

If a STBX is particularly controlling, I could see this system being abused if there is no way to dispute the subpoena beforehand and say “no, I should not have to provide this, and here’s why”