Brookfield Asset Mgmt., Inc. v. AIG Fin. Prods. Corp., No. 09 Civ. 8285(PGG)(FM), 2013 WL 142503 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2013) Upon receipt of “dueling letters” concerning the inadvertent production of privileged information (which had been redacted but could be viewed in the metadata), the court noted that such an event emphasized “the need for counsel… Continue Reading
Peerless Indus., Inc. v. Crimson AV, LLC, No. 1:11-cv-1768, 2013 WL 85378 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 8, 2013)
In this case, the court concluded that Defendants’ reliance on a vendor to accomplish collections from a non-party whose documents were in Defendants’ control was “insufficient” and granted Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions. Specifically, the court ordered Defendants to “show that they in fact searched for the requested documents and, if those documents no longer exist or cannot be located,” to “specifically verify what it is they cannot produce” and ordered Plaintiff to submit its bill of costs related to preparation of the motion.
Garcia v. City of Laredo, —F.3d—, 2012 WL 6176479 (5th Cir. Dec. 12, 2012) On appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s interpretation of the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”) and concluded that it does not apply to data stored in a personal cell phone. Plaintiff was previously employed as a police dispatcher for the… Continue Reading
On December 1, 2012, newly amended rules went into effect in the Western District of Washington, including rules addressing electronic discovery. Notably, the new rules now require that parties contemplating discovery of electronically stored information consider adopting the newly promulgated Model Agreement Regarding Discovery of Electronically Stored Information in Civil Litigation—a fairly comprehensive order addressing… Continue Reading
Micron Tech., Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., No. 00-792-SLR (D. Del. Jan. 2, 2013) Following remand from the Federal Circuit, the District Court considered the question of “whether Rambus acted in bad faith when it engaged in spoliation and the nature and extent of any prejudice suffered by Micron as a result . . . .”… Continue Reading
Effective January 1, 2013, the Delaware Court of Chancery has amended its rules “to account for modern discovery demands” and has “expanded its Guidelines for Practitioners,” originally released in January 2012. The Court’s press release summarizes the changes: The Court of Chancery will amend its Rules regarding discovery, effective January 1, 2013. Rules 26, 30,… Continue Reading
Day v. LSI Corp., No. CIV 11-186-TUC-CKJ, 2012 WL 6674434 (D. Ariz. Dec. 20, 2012) In this case arising from the alleged breach of an employment contract, discrimination, and related claims, the court found that Defendant was “at fault” for failing to preserve relevant evidence and imposed serious sanctions accordingly. Notably, the court’s analysis focused… Continue Reading