Motions to Compel – Page 3

ilsteam
October 5, 2018

Court Approves Plaintiff’s Proposed Search Terms for Searching Defendant’s ESI

In Shannon v. Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies, LLC., No. 4:17-CV-00787-DGK (W.D. Wi, July 20, 2018), the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant to run a search of Defendant’s Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”) using Plaintiff’s proposed search terms, finding Plaintiff’s proposed search terms proportional to

ilsteam
July 6, 2018

Judge Orders Production of Cell Phone Records in Golden State Case

In Ortiz v. Amazon.com LLC, et al, No. 17-cv-03820-JSW (MEJ) (N.D. Cal. May 25, 2018), a California magistrate court ordered the plaintiff to give the defendant, Golden State, his cell phone account holder’s name and address in order for the defendant to subpoena the cell phone records. The plaintiff had failed to provide court-ordered cell

ilsteam
June 27, 2018

Court Grants Partially Grants Spoliation Sanctions for Destroyed Video Footage

In Mizzoni v. Allison (Case No. 3-15-cv-00313-MMD-VPC.) (United States District Court, D. Nevada. May 14, 2018) the United States District Court for the District of Nevada decided on the Plaintiff’s motion for spoliation sanctions against the Defendant. Joseph Mizzoni, the Plaintiff, is an inmate in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections. Multiple Nevada

ilsteam
June 25, 2018

Court Grants Defendant’s Motion to Compel Discovery in Sexual Harassment Case

In Lassiter v. Hidalgo Medical Services (No. 17-cv-0850JCH/SMV, United States District Court, D. New Mexico, May 16, 2018), the United States District Court of New Mexico ruled on the Defendant’s motion to compel the production of a day planner in an employment retaliation case. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against her former employer, Hidalgo Medical

ilsteam
June 22, 2018

Why Were Search Terms for Both Sides Rejected by an Ohio Magistrate Judge?

In a recent ruling from Ohio Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers, search terms from both the plaintiff and defendant were found to be too broad in scope. If these terms were left to pass, they could incur massive e-discovery costs for both sides. This makes the terms too burdensome for either party or for

ilsteam
June 20, 2018

Are Discovery Disputes in Bankruptcy Court Subject to FRCP?

In Caesars Entertainment Operating Co., Inc., (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division) (May 29, 2018) Caesars is asking for bankruptcy protections. However, during the course of organizing creditors, two parties are claiming ownership of a particular liability. Now, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois has ruled on parts

ilsteam
June 8, 2018

Court Finds Production of Three Million Emails is Unreasonable

In Nece v. Quicken Loans, Inc. (Case No. 8:16-cv-2605-T-23CPT) (United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division), Eileen Nece (the plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against Quicken Loans, Inc. (the defendant) over allegations that it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Nece submitted four forms on Quicken’s website in December 2012 and also emailed quicken

ilsteam
June 1, 2018

Federal Appeals Court Requires Individualized Suspicion in Search of a Cellphone, But Not Necessarily a Warrant

In U.S. v. Kolsuz, (4th Cir. May 9, 2018), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth District determined requirements for a proper border search. Hamza Kolsuz (“Kolsuz”) was detained by federal customs agents at Washington Dulles International Airport while he was attempting to board a flight to Turkey. The customs agents, which found firearms

ilsteam
May 23, 2018

Court Determines Timeliness of Defendant’s Spoliation Sanctions Motion

In Travelers Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. of America v. Mountaineer Gas Co., No. 2:15-cv-0959 (S.D. West Virginia March 16, 2018), the Court is requested to consider a spoliation sanctions motion filed in a litigation arising from a boiler explosion at a medical center. The explosion led to a lawsuit between the insurance carrier and the

ilsteam
May 21, 2018

Court in Pharmaceuticals Products Liability Case Grants in Part Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Based on Relevancy

In Ideus v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 4:16CV3086, (D. Nebraska May 6, 2018), Stephanie Ideus (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion to compel production of documents. Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging she experienced complications during and after removal of ParaGard T-380 (” ParaGuard”), an intrauterine copper contraceptive device (“IUD”) manufactured