Category: News & Updates

1
Perelman Awarded $604.3 Million in Coleman v. Morgan Stanley
2
Gillette: Workers may have deleted e-mail
3
Advisory Committee Approves Amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
4
Electronic discovery ‘part of potentially every case in the 21st Century’
5
Zubulake Awarded $20.1 Million in Punitive Damages and $9.1 Million in Compensatory Damages
6
Morgan Stanley’s Failure to Produce Documents Found Offensive; Coleman’s Renewed Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Is Granted (in part)
7
Dealing with Data: No, You Can’t Call Them Documents Anymore
8
Are you prepared for the e-discovery FRCP?
9
Highlights (Day 2) from the Third Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
10
Highlights (Day 1) from the Third Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Perelman Awarded $604.3 Million in Coleman v. Morgan Stanley

A Florida jury awarded these damages in connection with Morgan Stanley helping Sunbeam to falsely inflate its finances. An award for punitive damages is still expected. Morgan Stanley said it would appeal, and additional discussions with a mediator are planned.

Judge Maas had instructed the jury to assume that Morgan Stanley helped Sunbeam inflate its earnings, so Perelman only had to establish detrimental reliance. This instruction had been issued because Morgan Stanley failed to produce email.

More detail can be found here on Bloomberg’s news site.

Gillette: Workers may have deleted e-mail

Gillette Co. said it is “possible” that senior executives deleted e-mail that may have included discussions of the company’s proposed $57 billion acquisition by Procter & Gamble Co. that are being sought by the Massachusetts regulators.

The company disclosed in a filing in Massachusetts Superior Court Monday that Gillette employees whose e-mail may be subject to a subpoena from Secretary of State William F. Galvin “simply did not retain e-mail and, instead, had a regular practice of deleting it.”

Click here for the complete story from The Boston Globe, May 11, 2005.

Advisory Committee Approves Amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

On April 14-15, 2005, the Civil Rules Advisory Committee met to discuss the fate of proposed amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to e-discovery. Taking into consideration feedback received during the recent public comment period, the Advisory Committee approved amendments to Rules 16, 26, 33, 34, and 45. The Committee also approved, in principle, amendments to Rule 37. Read More

Zubulake Awarded $20.1 Million in Punitive Damages and $9.1 Million in Compensatory Damages

This exceptionally large award was ordered in a landmark employee discrimination case that addressed important e-discovery issues including the preservation of email, cost-shifting, and the restoration of backup tapes.

Zubulake’s counsel told the jury that UBS had destroyed email and its officials had lied in court.

Judge Scheindlin instructed the jury to assume that email not preserved by UBS after Zubulake filed her complaint with the EEOC would have hurt UBS’ case.

UBS says that it will appeal.

The story can be found at here.

Morgan Stanley’s Failure to Produce Documents Found Offensive; Coleman’s Renewed Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Is Granted (in part)

Judge Maass issued this order on March 23 in Coleman v. Morgan Stanley, a case in which Coleman Holdings is seeking $680 million in losses and $2 billion in punitive damages in connection with Morgan Stanley helping Sunbeam to falsely inflate its finances. Read More

Dealing with Data: No, You Can’t Call Them Documents Anymore

In this March/April 2005 article from Business Law Today, George L. Paul and Robert F. Copple outline steps for a business to follow in developing data life-cycle policies. Such policies are designed to ensure that necessary data is preserved (in connection with litigation and Sarbanes-Oxley, for example) yet the business does not “drown in its digital waste.”

Full text of the article can be found here.

Are you prepared for the e-discovery FRCP?

An interesting article from PG Lewis & Associates’ March 2005 e-Newsletter on the recently released American Bar Association corporate counsel survey. Among other findings, the survey brings to light that more than “80 percent of Corporate counsel members are not aware of or familiar with the e-discovery ammendments.”

The original ABA survey report, ABA Digital Evidence Project Survey on Electronic Discovery Trends and Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, was published in February 2005.

Highlights (Day 2) from the Third Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

On February 11-12, 2005 in Washington, D.C., the Civil Rules Advisory Committee heard testimony from over 45 witnesses. This was the third and final set of public hearings on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to electronic discovery. Following are some highlights of the testimony from day two of the hearing, when the committee heard from 13 witnesses. The complete testimony for this hearing, and the previous hearings, can be found here. Read More

Highlights (Day 1) from the Third Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

On February 11-12, 2005 in Washington D.C., the Civil Rules Advisory Committee heard testimony from over 45 witnesses. This was the third and final set of public hearings on the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to electronic discovery. Following are some highlights of the testimony from day one of the hearing, when the committee heard from over 30 witnesses. The complete testimony for this hearing, and the previous hearings, can be found here. Read More

Copyright © 2018, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.