eDiscovery – International Litigation Services

ILS Team
November 13, 2019

Motion To Compel Native Production Denied Because Native Was Not Specified

In Smith v. TFI Family Services, Inc., No. 17-02235-JWB-GEB (D. Kan. Sep. 4, 2019), a Kansas Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Against Defendant to Show Good Cause Why it Should not be Held in Contempt and Motion for Sanctions for failing to produce ESI in native format with associated metadata. The denial was

ilsteam
October 2, 2019

Plaintiff Not Precluded From Introducing Evidence Regarding Missing ESI

In Saulsberry v. Savannah River Remediations, LLC., No. 1:16-cv-02792-JMC(D.S.C. Sep. 19, 2019), the United States District Court for South Carolina denied Defendant’s motion in limine to bar Plaintiff from making adverse comments regarding Defendant’s failure to produce certain relevant ESI on the grounds that doing so would amount to an absolute bar to Plaintiff’s ability

ilsteam
September 25, 2019

Protocol Which Deprived Defendants Opportunity to Review for Privilege Vacated

In Crosmun v. Trustees of Fayetteville Technical Community College, No. COA18-1054 (N.C. Ct. App. Aug. 6, 2019), the Court of Appeals of North Carolina vacated the lower court’s opinion and remanded for further proceedings after holding that the trial court abused its discretion by compelling the production of ESI through a protocol that allowed Plaintiff’s

ilsteam
September 18, 2019

Sanctions Granted Due To Defendant “Willfully” Acting To Prevent Plaintiff From Accessing Photographic Evidence

In Wilmoth v. Deputy Austin Murphy, No. 5:16-CV-5244 (W.D. Ark. Aug. 7, 2019), an Arkansas District Judge granted Plaintiff’s motion for spoliation on the grounds that Defendant’s conduct exhibited an “intent to deprive” Plaintiff of the use of photographs that supported Plaintiff’s excessive force claim against Defendant. This case involves claims of excessive use of

ilsteam
September 13, 2019

Failure To Preserve Police Dash Cam Video Results in Sanctions

In Woods v. Scissons, No. CV-17-08038-PCT-GMS (D. Ariz. Aug. 14, 2019), an Arizona Chief District judge granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions for spoliation of video footage of an arrest involving Plaintiff and Defendant, a police officer with the Prescott Police Department. In this case, the Court ruled that non-party

ilsteam
September 5, 2019

Failure To Disclose And Subsequent Deletion of Social Media Account Leads to Adverse Inference Sanction

In Cordova v. Walmart Puerto Rico, Inc., et. al., No. 16-2195 (ADC) (D.P.R. July 16, 2019), the judge imposed a sanction of adverse inference against Plaintiff due to Plaintiff’s failure to disclose and subsequent deletion of a social media account while the litigation was pending. This case involves allegations of unlawful discrimination, retaliation, and unjust

ilsteam
August 22, 2019

Court Orders Plaintiff to Produce Source Code and Log File, Despite Protective Order

In Opternative, Inc. v. Jand, Inc., 17-CV-6936 (RA)(SN)(S.D.N.Y. July 12, 2019), a New York Magistrate Judge granted in part and denied in part Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff to produce printouts of two files of source code, a log file, and a listing of directories and files despite such material being covered by a previously

ilsteam
August 15, 2019

Court Denies Plaintiff’s Request for His Entire PST File

In Russell v. Kiewit Corp., No. 18-2144-KHV (D. Kan. June 4, 2019), a Kansas Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s request to receive his entire e-mail personal storage (PST) file on the grounds that such a request was overbroad and not proportional to the underlying action. This case stems from Plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired in

ilsteam
August 9, 2019

Court Denies Plaintiff’s Request For Adverse Inference Due To Plaintiff’s Failure to Demonstrate Defendant’s Intent

In Drivetime Car Sales Company, LLC v. Pettigrew, No. 2:17-cv-371(S.D. Ohio April 18, 2019), the Judge granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s motion for an adverse inference sanction against Defendant Pauley Motor on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to sufficiently demonstrate that Defendant Bruce Pauley intentionally failed to take reasonable steps to preserve