Bow Tie Law

New Bad Idea: Claiming You Can Produce ESI as PDF’s because “Native File” is “Ambiguous”

In Cenveo Corp. v. Southern Graphic Sys., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108623 (D. Minn. Nov. 18, 2009), the Defendant propounded the following discovery request: “Defendant requests that these documents be produced in native format with all attachments in native format.” Cenveo Corp., at *2. The Plaintiff produced all electronically stored information[…]

Read more

Speedy Delivery: Compelling Imaging & Searching of Everything

In a contract dispute regarding a shipping vendor, the Plaintiff brought a motion to compel the collection and processing of the entire contents of Defendants’ hard drives, network drives, and user files.  Unishippers Global Logistics, LLC v. DHL Express (USA), Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94844 (D. Utah Oct. 12,[…]

Read more

Rock Opera Discovery of Archived ESI

In re In re Operadora DB Mex., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68078 (M.D. Fla. May 28, 2009), is the story of an international legal dispute, arbitration and the Hard Rock Café.  While all of that makes for an exciting feature act, we will rock out to the electronic discovery issues.  The[…]

Read more

Turning Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures into Rule 26(e) Supplemental Disclosures

What happens if more responsive documents are found after the case management order setting a required disclosure deadline? Answer: You must supplement your disclosure. In Kutrip v. City of St. Louis, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60199 (E.D. Mo. June 30, 2009), the deadline for discovery was November 30, 2006 and[…]

Read more

When You Have Over 100 “Any and All” Requests for Production, Don’t Complain About Lots of Documents to Review

When, as here, broad discovery requests lead to relevant documents being mixed in with seemingly irrelevant documents, the fault lies just as much with the party who made the request as with the party who produced documents in response to the request. District Court Judge Ted Stewart, Cmty. House, Inc. v.[…]

Read more

Telling the Judge ESI is “Expensive” is not an Excuse for Failing to Produce

It is generally a bad sign when an opinion begins with a Court banning parties from filing more discovery motions without the Court’s approval.  This is one of those cases.  Textron Fin. Corp. v. Eddy’s Trailer Sales, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60065 (E.D.N.Y. July 10, 2009). One of the[…]

Read more

Coffee, Donuts and a Meet & Confer on Electronically Stored Information

Dunkin’ Donuts sued to terminate a franchise agreement on the basis the Defendants breached their contract by erroneously reporting employee wages on an IRS W-2 Form and trademark infringement.  Dunkin’ Donuts Franchised Rests. LLC v. Grand Cent. Donuts, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52261, 4-5 (E.D.N.Y. June 19, 2009).  The[…]

Read more