Also known as: undue burden standards · undue burden · undue burden test · Casey standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A limitation on discovery obligations that excuses a party from producing electronically stored information or complying with a subpoena when the requested material is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. The responding party must demonstrate the inaccessibility. A court may still order production upon a showing of good cause while imposing conditions to mitigate expense.
A standard of review for state abortion regulations that invalidates any measure whose purpose or effect is to place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking a pre-viability abortion. Regulations that do not create such an obstacle survive even if they express respect for potential life. The standard replaces the trimester framework and balances state interests against the woman's liberty interest.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
A limitation on discovery obligations that excuses a party from producing electronically stored information or complying with a subpoena when the requested material is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. The responding party must demonstrate the inaccessibility. A court may still order production upon a showing of good cause while imposing conditions to mitigate expense.
Umbra Technologies received a broad request for five years of archived lab records stored on legacy servers. The company identified the servers as not reasonably accessible and moved for a protective order. The court required the requesting party to demonstrate good cause before ordering any production.
Ultimate Solutions moved for a protective order after opposing counsel noticed a deposition in a distant district. The motion included a certification of good-faith conferral. The court limited the deposition's location and allocated travel expenses to reduce the burden on the deponent.
United Bank received a subpoena demanding production of confidential customer transaction logs. Compliance would have required extensive manual review across multiple systems. The bank moved to quash on the ground that the subpoena subjected it to undue burden.
The party must demonstrate that the sources are not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. Once that showing is made, the requesting party may still obtain the information by demonstrating good cause under Rule 26(b)(2)(C).
A court may order discovery if the requesting party shows good cause, taking into account the limitations in Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may also specify conditions such as cost shifting to protect the responding party.
A standard of review for state abortion regulations that invalidates any measure whose purpose or effect is to place a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking a pre-viability abortion. Regulations that do not create such an obstacle survive even if they express respect for potential life. The standard replaces the trimester framework and balances state interests against the woman's liberty interest.
Umar Underwood challenged a state law requiring married women to notify their husbands before obtaining an abortion. The statute created a substantial obstacle for women in abusive relationships. The court struck down the provision under the undue burden standard.
Uma Upadhyay sought an abortion before viability. State law mandated a physician test for viability even when the physician believed the fetus was not viable. The requirement imposed a substantial obstacle and was invalidated.
Uliana Ustinova and other students challenged a pilot program requiring government-issued photo identification at campus polling places. The uniform rule advanced election-integrity interests without imposing a severe burden on any identifiable group. The court upheld the requirement.
The undue burden standard asks whether a regulation has the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking a pre-viability abortion. Strict scrutiny is not applied. Instead, only regulations that create such an obstacle are invalid.
Yes. Courts apply a balancing analysis that weighs the state's interests against any actual burden on voters. Evenhanded requirements that advance weighty interests without severe burdens are upheld.
A substantial obstacle exists when a regulation has the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus. Regulations that merely express respect for potential life without creating such an obstacle are permissible.
…of our dormant Commerce Clause jurisprudence has been the principle that the States may not impose regulations that place an undue burden on interstate commerce, even where those regulations do not discriminate between in-state and out-of-state businesses. See Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor…
…the District Court agreed, and concluded that Washington's assisted-suicide ban is unconstitutional because it "places an undue burden on the exercise of [that] constitutionally protected liberty interest." The District Court also decided that the Washington statute violated the Equal Protection Clause's requirement that…
…turn to the specific provisions of the Pennsylvania statute at issue. The Court of Appeals applied what it believed to be the
…instance, the welfare residence requirements are alleged to be unconstitutional on two grounds: first, because they impose an undue burden upon the constitutional right of welfare applicants to travel interstate; second, because they deny to persons who have recently moved interstate and would otherwise be eligible for…
…in that it makes unlawful a range of alternative responses that would be reasonable but would fall short of imposing an "