Knotty Issues of eDiscovery
If you are in the San Francisco Bay Area on May 5, I hope you can join us for the launch party for The Deponent App for the Apple iPad. Ted Brooks wrote an excellent review of The Deponent App in LTN that is available here. You are invited to[…]
Read moreThe Plaintiffs sued a police department after a traffic stop where they were detained for 45 minutes, handcuffed and a police dog sniffed around and in their car. Miller v. City of Plymouth, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41386, (N.D. Ind. Apr. 15, 2011). The facts were unsettling on many levels.[…]
Read moreThe Plaintiff sued his former wife and EgyptAir for abducting their children and taking the children from the United States to Egypt without his consent. The Defendant never appeared in the lawsuit and ignored the court proceedings. Bower v. Mirvat El-Nady Bower, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36677 (D. Mass. Apr.[…]
Read moreGiven the number of iPhones sold, it is no surprise to see a case like People v. Schutter. The Defendant had left his iPhone in a locked convenient store bathroom. When the Defendant went back to the store to get the phone, the store clerk refused, because the clerk was[…]
Read moreIn a case originating from a police shooting, the Plaintiffs included in their complaint a screen capture of the shooting officer’s MySpace page. Rice v. Reliastar Life Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32831, 11-13 (M.D. La. Mar. 29, 2011). The MySpace page included a 1960s era photo of Clint[…]
Read moreEEOC v. Jp Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., is gender discrimination case with multiple discovery disputes. EEOC v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34409, 6-7 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 30, 2011). One request for production called for “[w]hatever hardware, software, files, metadata, and properties in Defendant’s possession that[…]
Read more
There are battles that do not make sense. This is one of those cases. In a civil dispute over fraudulent investments, the Plaintiff brought a motion to compel the Defendant to “Bates Label” electronically stored information in native file format, because the local Discovery Practices Handbook required Bates numbering of[…]
Read moreThe Plaintiff, a professional Chicago interior designer, was the director of marketing, PR and e-commerce for the Defendant, a well-known interior designer. Maremont v. Susan Fredman Design Group, Ltd., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26441, at *4 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 15, 2011). After being injured in an accident, the Defendant impersonated[…]
Read moreHock Food, Inc. v. William Blair & Co., is a dispute over the calculation of the “success” fees paid to the Defendant in assisting the Plaintiff with the sale of their business interests. Hock Foods, Inc. v. William Blair & Co., L.L.C., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24874 (D. Kan. Mar.[…]
Read moreDiscovery Balancing Acts in a War Zone United States ex rel. McBride v. Halliburton Co., is a qui tam action over alleged fraudulent billing for services provided to the US military in Iraq. The case involved inflated headcounts in Morale, Welfare and Recreation (“MWR”) facilities and fraudulent billing for those costs to[…]
Read more