Tag:Other Federal Rule(s) of Civil Procedure and/or Evidence

1
Ottoson v. SMBC Leasing (S.D.N.Y., 2017)
2
Bailey v. Brookdale Univ. Hosp. Med. Ctr. (E.D.N.Y., 2017)
3
Hugler v. Jasper Contractors, 1:16-cv-3845-LMM-JSA (ND Ga, 2017)
4
CrossFit, Inc. v. Nat’l Strength & Conditioning Ass’n, No. 3:14-cv-01191-JLS-KSC (S.D. Cal. May 26, 2017)
5
First Am. Bankcard, Inc. v. Smart Bus. Tech., Inc., No. 2:15-cv-00638-KDE-JCW (E.D. La. May 24, 2017)
6
Omnigen Research v. Wang, No. 6:16-cv-00268-MC, 2017 WL 2260071 (D. Or. May 23, 2017)
7
Kennedy v. Supreme Forest (D.Conn, 2017)
8
Khatibi v. Bonura (S.D.N.Y, 2017)
9
Garcia v. City of Santa Clara (Northern District of California, 2017)
10
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger (U. S. Supreme Court, 2017)

Ottoson v. SMBC Leasing (S.D.N.Y., 2017)

Key Insight: whether adverse inference is warranted

Nature of Case: workplace discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: text messages, email

Keywords: relevance, prejudice, obligation to preserve, intent to deprive, gross negligence, inherent authority, sanctions, spoliation, fees, costs, adverse inference, bad faith, willfully

View Case Opinion

Bailey v. Brookdale Univ. Hosp. Med. Ctr. (E.D.N.Y., 2017)

Key Insight: accessibility of data, whether counsel had meaningful discussions with his client regarding the ESI agreement, whether the meet-and-confer was meaningful

Nature of Case: employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: e-mail

Keywords: cost shifting, ESI agreement, meaningful negotiation, meet-and-confer, undue burden or expense

View Case Opinion

Hugler v. Jasper Contractors, 1:16-cv-3845-LMM-JSA (ND Ga, 2017)

Key Insight: petitioner’s motion for contempt, subpoena enforcement

Nature of Case: subpoena duces tecum issued by US Dept. of Labor to Respondent, a roofing company. Workplace safety violations and follow-up inspections..

Electronic Data Involved: text and email messages

Keywords: subpoena duces tecum, failure to take reasonable steps to comply with the order

View Case Opinion

CrossFit, Inc. v. Nat’l Strength & Conditioning Ass’n, No. 3:14-cv-01191-JLS-KSC (S.D. Cal. May 26, 2017)

Key Insight: Lack of cooperation and deception on production does not lead to terminating sanctions if evidence was not actually destroyed but does lead to adverse inferences and cost shifting

Nature of Case: Unfair Competition

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records

Keywords: CrossFit, terminating sanctions, perjury

View Case Opinion

First Am. Bankcard, Inc. v. Smart Bus. Tech., Inc., No. 2:15-cv-00638-KDE-JCW (E.D. La. May 24, 2017)

Key Insight: Specific objections are required for proportionality claims

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Keywords: boilerplate, control, former owner and top officers

View Case Opinion

Omnigen Research v. Wang, No. 6:16-cv-00268-MC, 2017 WL 2260071 (D. Or. May 23, 2017)

Key Insight: Intentional deletion and refusal to produce evidence leads to default judgment

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Keywords: Default judgment, China, termination sanction

View Case Opinion

Kennedy v. Supreme Forest (D.Conn, 2017)

Key Insight: sanctions not appropriate for deletion of original recordings, no alteration of originals

Nature of Case: Termination of employment

Electronic Data Involved: audio recordings, transcripts, photographs

Keywords: deletion of original, termination of employment, Best evidence rule

View Case Opinion

Garcia v. City of Santa Clara (Northern District of California, 2017)

Key Insight: Sanction and adverse inference inappropriate because nothing lost/destroyed was highly probative

Nature of Case: Excessive force

Electronic Data Involved: emails, reports

Keywords: adverse inference

View Case Opinion

Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger (U. S. Supreme Court, 2017)

Key Insight: Slow responses to discovery; withholding information; Discovery fraud

Nature of Case: Personal Injury

Electronic Data Involved: Not specifically stated “documents”

Keywords: Attorney Fees; Bad Faith; Withholding information; Misconduct; Sanctions must be compensatory not punitive; Court’s inherent authority; But-For test

View Case Opinion

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