Tag: Motion to Compel

1
US EEOC v The George Washington University (D.D.C. 2020)
2
Lawson v. Spirit Aerosystems (Kansas, 2020)
3
Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. 2020)
4
Simpson v. J.L. Guess et al. (Middle District of Florida, 2020)
5
U.S. v. Morgan (Western District of New York, 2020)
6
Rodriguez-Ruiz v. Microsoft Operations Puerto Rico (District of Puerto Rico, 2020)
7
Shelton v. Fast Advance Funding, LLC (3rd Circuit, 2020)
8
Vaks v. Quinlan, et al. (District of Massachusetts, 2020)
9
Grande v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al (Western District of Washington, 2020)
10
White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin. (United States District Court, W.D. Washington, 2020)

US EEOC v The George Washington University (D.D.C. 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant was ordered to produce non-privileged emails responsive to RFP’s. Linear reivew proposed by Defendant wasn’t necessary and other paths existed. Concerns that potential production of privileged information was not enough to justify withholding. Defendant claimed a document by document review was needed, but court believed claw back provisions would be sufficient.

Nature of Case: employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Keywords: review process, 502, privilege

View Case Opinion

Lawson v. Spirit Aerosystems (Kansas, 2020)

Key Insight: When plaintiff was allowed to dictate defendant’s electronic discovery process, cost shifting to plaintiff is appropriate when electronic discovery performed was not proportionate to the case

Nature of Case: Employment non-compete agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records

Keywords: Cost shifting, technology assisted review, TAR, aerospace

View Case Opinion

Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. 2020)

Key Insight: The plaintiffs, current and former mortgage/residential loan officers of defendant, filed a motion for spoliation sanctions and entry of default judgment against defendant based on the failure to preserve and intentional destruction of email accounts and calendar data. The court found: (1) the ESI was relevant to the claims in the lawsuit; (2) defendant breached its duties by intentionally destroying ESI after learning that employees had accused defendant of not paying overtime and after being threatened with a lawsuit, and even after the lawsuit was filed and formal requests for production were received, it paid to order the destruction of additional backup tapes; and (3) the evidence is irretrievably lost. The court declined to enter a default judgment, concluding “[t]he availability of less drastic sanctions that have the ability to mitigate the damage caused by defendant’s egregious destruction of evidence is a powerful factor that militates against imposing dispositive sanctions.”

Nature of Case: Wage and Hour Class Action

Electronic Data Involved: Email and calendar accounts

Case Summary

Simpson v. J.L. Guess et al. (Middle District of Florida, 2020)

Key Insight: Proportionality need for records not related to the claim; Relevance; Access to records; Parties resources; Whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs it’s likely benefit

Nature of Case: Prisoner Pro Se – Unconstitutional use of excessive force by corrections officers

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy (discipline records/ Mail logs); collection

Keywords: Compel; Sanctions; Declaration of counsel; Malicious and sadistic purpose to inflict harm; State of Mind; Veracity; narrowed requests; meet and confer;

View Case Opinion

U.S. v. Morgan (Western District of New York, 2020)

Key Insight: encryption

Nature of Case: Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud; Money Laundering conspiracy

Electronic Data Involved: Servers, computers, storage media, iPhone

Keywords: Search warrant; “GrayKey” program to access passcodes; Unreasonable retention of the iPhone; Motion for Return of Property; 3 part test – 1.entitled to possession, 2. property not contraband, 3. either seizure was illegal or the government’s need for the property as evidence has ended; evidentiary burden

View Case Opinion

Rodriguez-Ruiz v. Microsoft Operations Puerto Rico (District of Puerto Rico, 2020)

Key Insight: Social media posts are generally not protected by privacy concerns, but discovery of social media posts do need to be limited and proportional to the case’s needs

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination

Electronic Data Involved: Social media posts

Keywords: Privacy, Facebook, Microsoft, wrongful termination, ADA, social media

View Case Opinion

Shelton v. Fast Advance Funding, LLC (3rd Circuit, 2020)

Key Insight: defendant argued that it had no obligation to respond to timely discovery requests because the due date of the discovery was after the discovery deadline.

Nature of Case: telemarketing violation

Electronic Data Involved: requests for admission

Keywords: discovery deadline, requests for admission

View Case Opinion

Vaks v. Quinlan, et al. (District of Massachusetts, 2020)

Key Insight: plaintiff violated the protective order by filing a pleading attaching confidential documents

Nature of Case: employment discrimintation

Electronic Data Involved: confidential documents protected under the protective order

Keywords: protective order, confidentiality

View Case Opinion

Grande v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al (Western District of Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: Defendants here have not described any harm that would result from producing the guidelines and have not sought a protective order, the Court declines to find the documents so confidential that they cannot be produced

Nature of Case: bad faith and fraudulent banking

Electronic Data Involved: general discovery responses, voicemails, loan documents, loan history, and communications

Keywords: fraud, trade secrets, incomplete responses, bad faith

View Case Opinion

White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin. (United States District Court, W.D. Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: good faith effort, a reasonable effort to respond must be made, obstructive and dilatory

Nature of Case: employment discrimination

Keywords: vague broad objections, Failing to fully investigate the case is not an excuse from making initial disclosures

View Case Opinion

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.