-
Defendants’ Unilateral Relevancy Redactions Leads To Monetary Sanctions
In Cuppels v. Mountaire Corporation, C.A. No.: S18C-06-009 (Del. Sup. Ct. June 29, 2020), the Delaware Superior Court awarded monetary sanctions to Plaintiffs as a result of Defendants’ inappropriate redactions. The case arose from claims made by Plaintiffs related to the operation of a chicken processing facility. Following Defendants’ motion
-
Motion To Compel Granted Following Finding that Defendant’s Self Collection Of ESI Was Inadequate
In EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. M1 5100 CORP., d/b/a JUMBO SUPERMARKET, INC., No. 9:19-cv-81320-WPD (S.D. Fla. 2020), the District Court granted, in part, Plaintiff’s motion to compel after finding that Defendant’s self-collection of ESI was inadequate. In this case, Plaintiff, the EEOC, filed it’s complaint under the Age Discrimination
-
Defendants Ordered to Produce Documents Improperly Withheld Even Though Documents Were Identified By Agreed Upon Search Terms
[kc_row use_container=”yes” force=”no” column_align=”middle” video_mute=”no” _id=”210407″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”564677″][kc_column_text] In OJ COMMERCE LLC, and NAOMI HOME, INC., v. KIDKRAFT, LP and MID-OCEAN PARTNERS, LP, No. 19-60341-CIV-COOKE/SNOW (S.D. Fla. 2020), the District Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of documents which were withheld by Defendants even though the documents were
-
Magistrate Judge Recommends Adverse Jury Instructions and Grants Motion for Sanctions Due to Spoliation of Emails and Text Messages
In Beverly John v. County of Lake, 18-cv-06935-WHA(SK) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 3, 2020), the Magistrate Judge recommended that the District Court provide adverse inference jury instructions to the jury based upon a finding that Defendants and their counsel spoliated evidence. The Magistrate Judge also determined that monetary sanctions were appropriate.
-
In Denying Forensic Exam, Court Rules that FRCP 34(a) Does Not Create A Routine Right of Direct Access To Electronic Information Systems
In The Ruby Slipper, LLC v. Belou, et al, No. 18-1548 (E.D. La April 6, 2020), Chief Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Supplemental Forensic Examination which sought to forensically examine previously undisclosed computers on the grounds that Defendant did not violate the previous Order on Protocol
-
Request For Inspection Of Cellphone Denied Where Request Was Not Proportional And Less Intrusive Production Of Text Messages Was Sufficient
In Santana v. MKA2 Enterprises, Inc., No. 18-2094-DDC-TJJ (D. Kan. Jan. 8, 2019), a Magistrate Judge denied Defendant’s Motion to Compel regarding Defendant’s request for Plaintiff to produce all of his cellphones for inspection and copying while also ordering Plaintiff to “produce complete copies of all responsive text messages to
-
Medical Record Metadata Ordered To Be Produced In Light Of Different And Conflicting Versions of Plaintiff’s Medical Records
In Miller v. Sauberman, Index No. 805270/16 (N.Y. Dec. 6, 2018), a New York Supreme Court Justice denied Defendant’s motion for a protective order and granted Plaintiff’s cross-motion to compel the production of metadata related to Plaintiff’s medical records, despite Defendant’s estimated cost of $250,000 to produce such records. In
-
Meet And Confer Impasse Reached With “OK. File Motion to Compel” Response
In White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin., No. C19-0284-JCC (W.D. Wash. Feb. 14, 2020), a Washington judge granted Defendant’s motion to compel after finding that Plaintiff’s conduct and responses did not reflect a good faith effort to comply with discovery rules. Accordingly, the Court ordered Plaintiff to provide
-
In Slip And Fall Case, Motion For Spoliation Of Video Denied Where No Duty to Preserve Video Arose Until After Lawsuit Was Filed
In Nguyen v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 9:19-cv-80393 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2020), a Florida Magistrate Judge denied plaintiff’s motion for sanctions for spoliation of a video allegedly showing a slip-and-fall by plaintiff on the grounds that defendant had no affirmative duty to preserve the video for the nearly two-year
-
Producing Party Not Required To Translate Nor Costs To Translate Shiftable Rules Court
In NY Machinery v. The Korean Cleaners Monthly, No. 2:17-12269-SDW-ESK (D. N.J. Jan. 6, 2020), a New Jersey Magistrate Judge denied plaintiff’s application seeking to compel defendants to translate documents served as part of their document production on the grounds that “Rule 34 does not address which party has the