Evidence Preservation: Handling the Issues in New York and New Jersey
On August 5, 2024, District Judge Amit P. Mehta (U.S. District Court, District of Columbia) ruled in United States v. Google LLC that Google violated §2 of the Sherman Act by monopolizing the internet search engine market....more
A motion for an adverse inference was denied in Pratt v. Robbins, et al., 2024 WL 234730, Case No. 5:20-cv-170-GCM (W.D. N.C. Jan. 22, 2024) where Defendants failed to preserve or produce a video that might have contained...more
If you’re an attorney, a paralegal, an investigator, a law enforcement officer, or even if you just watch a lot of legal dramas on television, you’re likely familiar with the term “chain of custody”....more
A recent decision declined to find the requisite “intent to deprive” that would merit sanctions under Rule 37(e) when a plaintiff was unable to produce text messages because his phone had been stolen and he had not taken...more
Few terms make litigators shudder like the dreaded spoliation; and for good reason. The consequences of a company’s failure to preserve evidence that might be relevant in prospective litigation can be severe. What many...more
The preservation of, or failure to preserve, ESI in a litigation context provides ample opportunities for counsel to stumble and is a fertile area of case law. In this blog we will look at Hollis v. CEVA Logistics U.S., Inc.,...more
In New York and New Jersey, parties have certain duties to ensure preservation of evidence. Join Goldberg Segalla’s Rosa D. Forrester and Aaron M. VanNostrand for a discussion of when those duties are triggered, how to...more
Generally, a litigation hold letter* will issue to preserve documents and information potentially relevant to a reasonably anticipated lawsuit. However, when does one’s duty to preserve potentially relevant documents end? ...more
The duty to preserve potentially relevant evidence – documentary or electronic – arises when a lawsuit is reasonably anticipated. Although this is a subjective standard, Parlux Fragrances, LLC et al v. S. Carter...more
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e)(2), imposition of the most severe sanctions for failure to preserve relevant electronically stored information — a presumption that the information lost was unfavorable, an...more
This is what it sounds like, when sanctions are granted. In March 2019, a federal judge in Minnesota sanctioned Defendants for their failure to preserve text messages in a copyright infringement suit brought in part by the...more
We’ve all been there: something happens that causes your organization to reasonably anticipate litigation, whether it’s the receipt of a preservation letter, a breach of a contract, or even service of a filed complaint....more
It was a tragedy. The 1977 plane crash that killed Ronnie Van Zant and Steven Gaines almost ended the band Lynyrd Skynyrd forever. In the wake of the crash, the survivors swore an oath never again to perform as “Lynyrd...more
In Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., No. 7:16-CV-18-D (E.D.N.C. June 7, 2017), Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr., denied Plaintiff Eshelman’s motion seeking a jury instruction in response to Puma Biotechnology Inc.’s...more
The combination of emerging technologies, information security risks and electronic discovery obligations continues to give rise to questions regarding best practices for adoption of modern ephemeral communication tools in...more
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