Reporter subpoenaed to testify at trial in lawsuit over Indiana warehouse fire

Mike Emery, a reporter for Western Wayne News, was subpoenaed on Aug. 28, 2026, to testify at a civil trial in Indianapolis, Indiana, about his coverage of a warehouse fire in 2023 that burned for three days and displaced thousands. A federal judge struck down the request Sept. 11.

Two residents and a business in Richmond filed a class-action lawsuit against the owner of a plastic recycling facility in April 2023, WRTV reported, after a large industrial fire forced the plaintiffs to evacuate and allegedly contributed to various health issues.

Emery reported on the fire and its potential causes, citing public records and comments from multiple government officials.

As the legal case approached its trial date more than three years later, defense attorneys for Cornerstone Trading Group issued a subpoena commanding Emery to testify during the scheduled Sept. 17 trial.

Attorneys representing the journalist filed a motion to quash the subpoena Sept. 9, arguing that the defendant’s request violated court rules, as well as state and constitutional law. Additionally, they wrote, its sole purpose was to bring Emery’s article before the jury as a summary of the facts underlying the suit.

“Journalists like Mr. Emery can be tempting subpoena targets for parties and counsel looking for a shortcut,” they wrote. “Instead of hiring investigators or preparing opening statements, attorneys could dragoon reporters into providing basic information about a case and then summarizing it for the jury.”

Emery’s attorneys argued that such requests chill newsgathering and reporting, demonstrating the importance of stronger protections for journalists.

District Court Judge Tanya Walton Pratt agreed, ruling in a decision two days later that defendants provided no justification for burdening the journalist. She added that all of the city officials cited in the article were already listed on both the plaintiffs’ and defendants’ witness lists.

“Even if Emery’s testimony was relevant,” she wrote, “mere relevance is not enough to subpoena the fruits of a news outlet’s investigation.”

The defendants were given until Oct. 2 to respond to Emery’s request that they reimburse him for his attorney’s fees.