-
Court Orders Discovery of Chadbourne & Parke Partners’ Personal Emails in Sex Discrimination Suit
In the headline-grabbing $155 million dollar sex discrimination lawsuit, a Manhattan federal judge has ordered six lawyers with senior positions at the prestigious law firm Chadbourne & Parke LLP to search their personal email accounts for documents related to the discrimination suit. The court ordered the search over Defendants’ objections,
-
Court Declines to Answer Spoliation Question from Parties, Instead Discloses Instructions to Jury Regarding Spoliation
In GN Netcom, Inc. v. Plantronics, Inc., C.A. No.1201318-LPS, (Dist. Ct. D. Del., 2017), the Court states that rather than respond to spoliation-related questions posed by Plaintiff GN Netcom, Inc. (“GN” or “Plaintiff”) and Defendant Plantronics, Inc. (“Plantronics” or “Defendant”), the Court has determined the jury instructions it will give
-
Email Fabrication Claim Required More Evidence Per FRCP 37 Criteria To Warrant Sanctions Order
In Catrinar v. Wynnestone Communities Corporation, No. 14-1872, (E.D. Mich., 2017), although Plaintiff claimed Defendants created fake email evidence, the Court declined to issue sanctions. On May 9, 2014, Plaintiff Lawrence Catrinar filed suit against his former employer Defendant Wynnestone Communities Corporation and and its representative Gilbert B. Silverman (“Defendants”)
-
District Court Disagrees with Magistrate Over Privilege Waiver After Plaintiff Places Privileged Files on Public Shared Drive
In Harleysville Insurance Co. v. Holding Funeral Home, Inc., et. al., Case No. 15-0057 (W.D. Va., Feb 9, 2017), Plaintiff sued to determine that it does not owe Defendants for their fire loss claim because the fire was caused by arson, and because Defendants made material misrepresentations and failed to
-
Third-Party Production Reveals that Defendant Deleted Emails; Court Issues Spoliation Sanctions
In Edelson v. Cheung, No. 2:13-cv-5870 (D.N.J. 2017), Plaintiff sought spoliation sanctions for Defendant’s deletion of emails, arguing that a third party production revealed that Defendant had deleted emails and intended to keep an email account hidden from Plaintiff. On October 2, 2013, Plaintiff instituted an action against Defendant Stephen
-
Court Examines Whether Public and “Private” Communications on Social Media Are Treated Differently in Discovery
The opinion in Brown vs. City of Ferguson, No. 4:15-cv-00831-ERW, (E.D. Mo., 2017) examined the question of whether public and “private” communications on social media are treated differently for purposes of discovery. On January 4, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to disclose all social media of Plaintiffs and Michael Brown
-
Was Your Confidential Data Exposed on Translate.com?
Machine translation is an essential tool for many businesses and organizations in today’s world. We work with people who speak different languages, especially in cases where operations have been outsourced to foreign countries. In other cases, important documents need to be translated. It would be difficult or impossible to conduct
-
User Beware: Cloud-Based Machine Translation Software Comes with Major Security Risks
The free machine translation site Translate.com is in hot water after Norway’s state-run oil company Statoil discovered that confidential data the company entered into the site has become searchable through Google and Microsoft search engines. The company found that its workforce reduction plans, dismissal letters, contracts, and other sensitive information –
-
Plaintiff Unable to Establish Spoliation Despite Suspicious Activity
Can use of computer wiping software be innocuous once litigation commences, or is such use sufficient evidence of wrongdoing to establish spoliation sanctions? The court considered this question in HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc. v. Valda Flowers, No 1:15-cv-3262-WSD (N.D. Georgia, January 30, 2017). Plaintiff sued Defendant for alleged misappropriation of
-
Defendants in Putative Class Action Suit Required to Provide Email Information
In Munguia-Brown, et. al. v. Equity Residential, et. al., Case No. 16-01225 (N.D. Cali., June 20, 2017), Plaintiffs asserted that landlord Defendants charged Plaintiffs improper late fees in violation of California law. Plaintiffs sought discovery of the names of employees involved in the decision to adopt the late fee policy