Knotty Issues of eDiscovery
Driving the Snakes from e-Discovery, the first seminar by the Santa Clara County Bar Association e-Discovery Task, will be on March 17, 2011 in San Jose, California. This two-hour seminar is the first of a four-part series on e-Discovery in Silicon Valley. To register for the panel, please click here. […]
Read moreIt is surprising this has not happened earlier: Two jurors meet and “friend” each other on Facebook during a criminal trial in California State Court. The Criminal Defendant is found guilty. Juror Number Five later informed the Criminal Defense Attorney the Juror Number One (hereinafter the Plaintiff) made comments about[…]
Read moreA short Civil Procedure Overview: 1) A protective order must correspond to a discovery request; and 2) A motion to compel needs to have an underlying request. In an auto-recall case, the Plaintiff had produced 1.79 million pages of documents in discovery, plus an additional 84,000 pages of documents from[…]
Read moreWhen sanctions are issued in Chicago on St. Valentine’s Day, you can imagine how the losing party might feel. The Defendants in a sexual and racial discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment and retaliation case did not properly preserve evidence or respond to specific discovery requests. Northington v. H&M Int’l, 2011[…]
Read moreA registered Facebook user allegedly gained unauthorized access to 116,000 Facebook accounts and sent in excess of 7.2 million spam email messages. Facebook, Inc. v. Fisher, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9668, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2011). These spam emails were designed to “phish” for log-in information from Facebook[…]
Read more
Is entering a default judgment against a party for destroying a laptop excessive and unduly harsh? Not in Utah. Daynight, LLC v. Mobilight, Inc., 2011 UT App 28, P2 (Utah Ct. App. 2011). Daynight involved a destroyed laptop and what was the appropriate sanction for the destruction of evidence. Certainly[…]
Read moreMany attorneys, as with a large contingent of the general public, do not possess much, if any, technological savvy. Although the Committee does not believe that attorneys must develop a mastery of the security features and deficiencies of each technology available, the duties of confidentiality and competence that attorneys owe[…]
Read moreIs a computer generated printout a statement according to the hearsay rules? California law says “no.” People v. Nazary, 2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 2207 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. Dec. 31, 2010) People v. Nazary is an appeal from an embezzlement conviction. Part of the evidence offered against the Defendant included[…]
Read moreIn an employment dispute, the Plaintiff claimed the Defendants had a duty to preserve electronically stored information at the beginning of an HR investigation after she sent a letter outlying concerns with her manager. The Plaintiff was ultimately put on a performance review and terminated. Viramontes v. United States Bancorp, 2011[…]
Read moreFlash drives were the center of a discovery dispute in a trade secret dispute between high-speed printer service providers. OcÉ N. Am. v. McS Servs., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5403 (D. Md. Jan. 20, 2011). The Plaintiff sought a forensic image of the flash drives, because the devices contained their software alleged[…]
Read more