until its amendment in 1991. The FAA was passed in 1947. Under the original version of Rule 45, federal courts could not enforce pre-hearing document subpoenas on non-parties. The then-existing text of Rule 45(a) stated that “[ejvery subpoena ... shall command each person to whom it is directed to attend and give testimony.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(a) (1990). Further, Rule 45(b) provided that “[a] subpoena may also command the person to whom it is directed to produce the books, papers, documents, or tangible things designated therein.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(b) (1990). This text was consistently read to limit the power of federal courts to order pre-trial discovery from non-parties. See Newmark v. Abeel, 106 F.Supp. 758, 759 (S.D.N.Y.1952) (“There is not authority for the sex 269, 276 (4th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). 2 . An excellent analysis of this particular
holding that a discovery exception to a statute of limitation applies only to the discovery of facts not discovery of the law holding that dismissal for discovery violations was an extreme remedy but warranted under the facts of the case recognizing trial courts decision on discovery issues implies a finding that requested discovery was not reasonably available holding that implicit in the arbitrators power to subpoena relevant documents at hearing is the power to order prehearing discovery holding that prehearing discovery is not available except for a showing of a special need or extreme hardship