Knotty Issues of eDiscovery
The Plaintiff in ADT Sec. Servs. v. Pinancle Sec., LLC, objected to a Magistrate Judge’s denial to a motion to compel to redo the Defendant’s search for responsive ESI. The Plaintiff’s argued the Defendants failed to search individual employee computers and back-up tapes. Additionally, the Plaintiff’s highlighted a considerable disparity[…]
Read more
Judge Facciola stands as one of the single most prolific Federal Magistrate Judges in the United States. Once again, the bow tie wearing jurist eloquently laid down the law in Tadayon v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. The discovery order concluded with the following passage: III. High Noon As explained at the[…]
Read moreNews Am. Mktg. In-Store Servs., is a breach of contract case involving multiple eDiscovery disputes. According to the Plaintiff, the Defendant did the following: Destroyed relevant email evidence, including an email server; Failed to produce responsive documents in discovery due to the above failure; and Failed to run appropriate ESI searches[…]
Read moreA Plaintiff sought a writ of mandamus after a trial court ordered the production of the Plaintiff’s personal computer and email accounts. The Court of Appeals of Texas granted the writ. In re Jordan, 364 S.W.3d 425 (Tex. App. Dallas 2012). The case involved claims of a sexually hostile work[…]
Read moreIn a case involving claims of copyright infringement of fabric design, the tapestry of the Plaintiff’s discovery production was challenged, including allegations the Plaintiff: Neglected to search for and produce several categories of documents; and Deleted relevant emails. The Defendants sought an order permitting a forensic examination of Plaintiff’s computer[…]
Read moreWhen you think of Tom Wolfe’s “The Right Stuff,” test pilots and astronauts immediately come to mind. Aviators who risked their lives testing new technology that went higher and faster than anything else that could fly. The pilots who flew the X planes of the 1940s to 1960s built the[…]
Read morePlaintiffs unsuccessful in a trial involving hostile work environment allegations, argued they were entitled to a new trial, because the trial court did not issue a adverse inference instruction for alleged destroyed ESI. Kullman v. New York, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47649, 3-5 (N.D.N.Y Apr. 4, 2012). The Court agreed[…]
Read moreJudge David Waxse waded into a case that highlighted issues in parties not cooperating and possible inadequate preservation, search and production of ESI. Chura v. Delmar Gardens of Lenexa, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36893, 7-8 (D. Kan. Mar. 20, 2012). The litigation involved an employment dispute with claims of[…]
Read moreAre photos and data from a red light camera hearsay? The answer is “no” according to the Court of Appeal in People v Goldsmith and conflicts with People v. Borzakian, discussed on the blog Developments in California Trial Practice. Goldsmith also addressed whether the admission of computer-generated photographs and a[…]
Read moreJo Ann Howard & Assocs., P.C. v. Cassity, is a dispute over the production of a Defendant’s initial disclosures. The Defendant described various ESI and other documents as part of their initial disclosures pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 26(a)(1). Jo Ann Howard & Assocs., P.C. v. Cassity,[…]
Read more