News & Analysis as of

Email Discovery

Court Adds Some of the Custodians Requested by Plaintiffs to Discovery, But Not All: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Mann, et al. v. City of Chicago, et al, Nos. 15 CV 9197, 13 CV 4531 (N.D. Ill. Sep. 8, 2017), Illinois Magistrate Judge Mary M. Rowland granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel the defendant to...more

How Much Circumstantial Evidence is Enough for Spoliation Sanctions?

by Exterro, Inc. on

We’ve all heard, “It’s not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game.” But how you play the game is often a big part of ending up on the winning side in e-discovery. In today’s world, it has almost become normal that...more

Court Grants Lesser Sanctions Against Defendant for Various Discovery Issues: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In New Mexico Oncology v. Presbyterian Healthcare Servs. No. 1:12-cv-00526 MV/GBW (D.N.M. Aug. 16, 2017), New Mexico Magistrate Judge Gregory B. Wormuth, detailing numerous defendant discovery deficiencies alleged by the...more

Court Holds That Self-Selection Of Emails By Employee Satisfies Discovery Obligations

by Jackson Lewis P.C. on

In Mirmina v. Genpact, LLC, Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-00614 (D. Conn. July 27, 2017), a federal court in an employment discrimination matter denied the plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery, finding that the defendant’s...more

Court Sanctions Counsel for Not Disclosing Deleted Client Emails

by Zapproved LLC on

People v. Miller, No. 16PDJ067, 2017 BL 208514 (Colo. June 1, 2017). In a brief order, the Colorado Supreme Court fined and publicly censured attorney Randall Miller for failing to promptly disclose false evidence. During...more

Court Shifts Costs of Forensic Computer Exam to Plaintiff for Not Preserving Emails

by Zapproved LLC on

Estate of Shaw v. Marcus, Nos. 14 Civ. 3849 (NSR) (JCM), 14 Civ. 5653 (NSR) (JCM), 2017 WL 825317 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 1, 2017). In this complex dispute over a family business, the court redressed the plaintiff’s former...more

Surreptitious Cyber-Conduct Results In New York County Decision Striking Defendant’s Answer

by Farrell Fritz, P.C. on

In a decision dated May 26, 2017, Justice Chan of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, struck the defendant’s answer. Although the Court acknowledged that the imposition of this particular sanction...more

The E-Discovery Digest - June 2017

The seventh edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses....more

In a Second Case, Judge Specifies Search Terms for Parties to Use: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Abbott v. Wyoming Cty. Sheriff’s Office, No. 15-CV-531W (W.D.N.Y. May 16, 2017), New York Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott granted the plaintiff’s motion to compel and defendant’s cross-motion in part, ordering the defendant...more

First Department Finds Work-Product Protection Not Waived by Storage of Documents on Company Laptop

On June 6, 2017, the First Department had an opportunity to apply—and reaffirm—last month’s decision in Peerenboom v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC, where the Court held that use of a company email system for personal purposes “does...more

Despite Parties’ “Significant Animosity”, Court Orders Them to Meet and Confer: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Elhannon LLC v. F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Co., No. 2:14-cv-262 (D. Vermont, Apr. 18, 2017), Vermont District Judge William K. Sessions, III granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff’s renewed motion to compel,...more

Court Says Rule 37(e) Doesn’t Apply When Recording Was Intentionally Deleted: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Hsueh v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Fin. Services, No. 15 Civ. 3401 (PAC) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2017), New York District Judge Paul A. Crotty relied upon inherent authority to impose sanctions and determined “that an adverse...more

Client Sends Privileged Email From iPhone That Triggers Inadvertent Production Rule

by Buchalter on

Eight years ago the Second District Court of Appeal issued a decision establishing an attorney’s ethical duties upon receipt in discovery from opposing counsel of an inadvertently produced, privileged communication. State...more

Lack of Cooperation Leads to Court to Order Scope of Discovery for Defendant: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Bird v. Wells Fargo Bank, No. 16-1130 (E.D. Cali., Mar. 31, 2017), after the parties could not agree on the parameters and scope of discovery, California Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean ordered the defendant to produce...more

Brunswick Rail Wins Emergency Evidence Protection in Trade Secret Case Against Former Employees

by Zapproved LLC on

OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt. v. Sultanov, No. 5:17-cv-00017-EJD, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2343 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 6, 2017). The court partially granted the plaintiff, OOO Brunswick Rail Mgmt., a motion for emergency evidence...more

E-Discovery Lessons from the State Investigation of Alabama Governor Robert Bentley

by Exterro, Inc. on

From the beginning, e-discovery has mainly been the realm of corporate legal teams leveraging their knowledge of the e-discovery process along with technology to reach a “just and speedy” resolution to the matter as laid out...more

Exploring the Limits of Compliance With a Data Subject Access Request

by Faegre Baker Daniels on

Holyoake v Candy and another [2017] EWHC 52 (QB) saw the U.K. High Court look into the issue of compliance with a data subject access request (DSAR). The parties in this case were already involved in high-value court...more

S.D.N.Y. Litigators Hit Snooze Button, Magistrate Judge Peck Issues Second “Wake-Up Call” for “Every Litigator”

by Butler Snow LLP on

Renowned (e)discovery guru (and I use that term advisedly) Andrew Peck, a U.S. Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of New York, recently issued what he termed a “wake-up call” to the Bar in his District. It was...more

"The E-Discovery Digest - March 2017"

The sixth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses. Please see...more

California Supreme Court Rules Public Officials' and Employees' Personal Accounts Do Not Escape Reach of Public Records Act

by Downey Brand LLP on

On March 2, 2017, the California Supreme Court ruled in City of San Jose v. Superior Court that where a public employee uses a personal email account or texts to communicate about the conduct of public business, those...more

Why Courts Should Not Go 'Over and Above' the Federal Rules to Impose Sanctions for Loss of ESI

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

A recent case offers a cautionary tale of how courts may cite to the requirements of amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e), which governs imposing sanctions for failure to preserve electronically stored information...more

Jason R. Baron of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Part 2: eDiscovery Trends

by CloudNine on

This is the fifth of the 2017 Legaltech New York (LTNY) Thought Leader Interview series.  eDiscovery Daily interviewed several thought leaders at LTNY (aka Legalweek) this year to get their observations regarding trends at...more

Privileged information is generally safe from Subject Access Requests

by White & Case LLP on

Subject Access Requests ("SARs") are an increasingly popular weapon in litigation, because they can be used to provide a cheap and quick form of pre-action disclosure. However, courts have confirmed that information subject...more

With No Intent or Duty to Preserve, Court Finds No Spoliation Occurred: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Archer et. al. v. York City School District, et. al., No. 13-2826 (M.D. Pa., Dec. 28, 2016), Pennsylvania District Judge John E. Jones, III ruled that the plaintiffs had presented no evidence showing that the defendants...more

Court Orders Plaintiff to Produce Emails with Original Metadata: eDiscovery Case Law

by CloudNine on

In Singh et. al. v. Hancock Natural Resources Group, Inc. et. al., No. 15-1435 (E.D. Cal., Dec. 29, 2016), California Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston granted the defendants’ motion to compel (in part), ordering the...more

72 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Cybersecurity

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.