Email – International Litigation Services

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
July 17, 2019

Judge Rules There is No Duty on Non-Parties to Preserve Evidence

In Shamrock-Shamrock, Inc. v. Remark, No. 5D18-1987 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2019), the District Court of Appeals, Fifth District, ruled in favor of Appellee, holding that there is no duty on nonparties to a lawsuit to preserve evidence based on the foreseeability of litigation. This case stems from Appellant’s suit against the City

ilsteam
May 16, 2019

No Spoliation For Lost Emails Under FRCP 37(e) Where Potential Prejudice is Purely Speculative

In CIGNEX Datamatics, Inc. v. Lam Research Corporation, No. 17-320-MN (D. Del. Mar. 11, 2019), the court denied Defendant’s motions for spoliation and for sanctions, finding insufficient evidence that Plaintiff suffered prejudice due to the deleted electronically stored information (“ESI”). This case stems from a breach of contract in which Plaintiff agreed in January 2015

ilsteam
January 9, 2019

SDNY Dismisses Action After Finding Plaintiff Fabricated Emails

In Comlab, Corp. v. Kal Tire, et al., Case No. 17-cv-1907(KBF)(S.D. N.Y. September 11, 2018), the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Defendant’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions on the grounds that Plaintiff willfully and in bad-faith fabricated and spoliated relevant evidence. In this breach of contract action, Plaintiff allege

ilsteam
January 7, 2019

Lack of Intent to Deprive Means No Spoliation Sanctions Where Defendant Copied and Later Deleted Plaintiff’s Email

In Worldplay, US, Inc. v. Haydon and Eunyt LLC, No. 17-cv-4179 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 14, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied Plaintiff’s Motions for Sanctions on the grounds that Plaintiff had not suffered prejudice under Rule 37(e)(1) due to allegedly destroyed electronically stored information and that Defendants had

ilsteam
January 2, 2019

Court Chides Defendant for Allowing Deletion of Key Instant Messages

In Franklin v. Howard Brown Health Ctr., Case No. 17 C 8376 (N.D. Ill. October 4, 2018), a workplace harassment and discrimination case, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recommended that Plaintiff’s motion for discovery sanctions be granted to the extent that the “parties be allowed to present evidence and

ilsteam
September 28, 2018

Court Orders Defendant To Produce Responsive Emails In Native Format

In City of San Jose v. JUM GLOBAL, LLC., Case No. 16-cv-01462-VKD (N.D. Ca. July 11, 2018), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted Plaintiff’s motion for an order compelling Defendant to produce its responsive electronically stored information (“ESI”) in native format after Defendant had previously produced its responsive ESI

ilsteam
July 2, 2018

District Judge in Kansas Sanctions Secretary of State Kris Kobach for Discovery Competence Failures

In the consolidated cases of Fish v. Kobach and Bednasek v. Kobach, the plaintiffs challenged Kansas’ documentary proof-of-citizenship law. Based on the grounds that the law had prevented more than 35,000 Kansans from registering to vote, the plaintiff sought a court order requiring the state to register thousands who tried to register at the state’s

ilsteam
June 18, 2018

SDNY Order Provides That Special Master Review 3,300 Page Privilege Log

In Winfield v. City of New York (Case No. 15-cv-05236, (S.D.N.Y. May 10, 2018), New York Magistrate Judge Katherine H. Parker denied Plaintiff’s request to take a “quick” look at Defendant’s 3,300-page privilege log. Instead, the judge ordered that a special master review the documents. Winfield involves plaintiffs who are seeking redress for alleged discrimination in

ilsteam
June 11, 2018

Carbon Copying a Lawyer Does Not Create an Automatic Privileged Communication, U.S. District Court Rules

In Texas Brine Co., LLC v. Dow Chem. Co., No 15-1102, 2017 WL 5625812 (E.D. La. Nov. 21, 2017), the Eastern District of Louisiana found that carbon copying (CC) legal counsel does not automatically protect that communication as privileged. This issue was evaluated by Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld when the defendant challenged Plaintiff’s privilege