When a subpoena duces tecum is served upon a custodian of records or other qualified witness as provided in Article 4 (commencing with Section 1560) of Chapter 2 of Division 11 of the Evidence Code, and his personal attendance is not required by the terms of the subpoena, Section 1989 shall not apply.
§ 1987.3.Service of subpoena duces tecum upon custodian of
Title 3. Of the Production of Evidence · Chapter 2. Means of Production · Enacted 1970 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026
In one sentenceSection 1987.3 provides that when a subpoena duces tecum is served on a records custodian under the Evidence Code's business records article and does not require that custodian's personal attendance, the residency requirement in Section 1989 does not apply.
Full Text of § 1987.3
Plain-English Summary
Section 1989 ordinarily limits how far a witness can be required to travel to comply with a subpoena, a protection built around the burden of personally showing up. This section recognizes that a records-only subpoena does not impose that same burden, and it removes the residency limitation for that narrower category of request.
When a subpoena duces tecum is served on a custodian of records, or another qualified witness, under the Evidence Code's business records article, and the subpoena does not require that person's personal attendance, Section 1989 does not apply. A custodian asked only to produce records, without having to travel and appear, is not shielded by a rule designed to protect a witness from being dragged far from home to testify.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does Section 1987.3 exempt from Section 1989's residency requirement?
A subpoena duces tecum served on a custodian of records, or other qualified witness, under the Evidence Code's business records provisions, where personal attendance is not required.
Why doesn't Section 1989 apply to a records-only subpoena?
Because Section 1989 protects witnesses from the burden of traveling to personally appear, a burden that is not present when the subpoena requires only the production of records, not attendance.
Does this exemption apply if the custodian is also required to personally appear?
No, the exemption applies specifically where personal attendance is not required by the subpoena's terms.
Amendment History
(Added by Stats.1970, c. 590, p. 1171, § 1.)
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from
the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature.
Last verified July 29, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: records custodian subpoena residency exemptionbusiness records subpoena no personal attendance