Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., No. MJG-06-2662 (D. Md. Jan. 24, 2011) On January 24, 2011, Magistrate Judge Grimm entered an order awarding $1,049,850.04 in attorney’s fees and costs as a sanction for discovery abuse, as discussed in Victor Stanley II. The amount addressed “attorney’s fees and costs associated with all discovery that… Continue Reading
Last week the Delaware Court of Chancery issued new guidelines addressing the preservation of electronically stored information. The guidelines are intended to “remind all counsel … of their common law duty to their clients and the court with respect to the preservation of electronically stored information.” Although less than two pages long, the guidelines offer… Continue Reading
Holmes v. Petrovich Dev. Co., LLC, 2011 WL 117230 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2011)
Where plaintiff used her company’s computer to communicate with her attorney despite knowledge of policies prohibiting such use and establishing that employees had no right of privacy as to such materials, the court found that the emails “did not constitute ‘confidential communication between client and lawyer’ within the meaning of Evidence Code section 952″ and thus were not privileged and affirmed the holdings of the trial court.
In re Fontainebleau Las Vegas Contract Litig., 2011 WL 65760 (S.D. Fla. Jan 7, 2011)
In this case, the court found that privilege had been waived as a result of a third party’s voluntary production of servers believed to contain privileged materials without review.
As a way of continuing to enhance the value of Electronic Discovery Law, we recently embarked on a project with the e-Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) to classify the more than 1,800 cases in our case database according to the EDRM standards. These cases will retain their existing searchable tags in addition to the new EDRM… Continue Reading
Rattray v. Woodbury County, 2010 WL 5437255 (N.D. Iowa Dec. 27, 2010) In this case, the court imposed sanctions for defendants’ failure to preserve relevant video footage and ordered an instruction allowing the jury to determine whether the recording was destroyed in bad faith and, if so, to infer that it would have been unfavorable to… Continue Reading