-
Cruise Line’s Alleged Failure To Preserve Video Was No Basis For Spoliation Sanctions
In Reed v Royal Caribbean Cruises, No. 1:2019cv24668 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 2, 2020), Plaintiff moved for spoliation sanctions on the grounds that Defendant failed to preserve videos of an alleged incident during a cruise. Plaintiff was a passenger on a cruise operated by Defendant. According to the complaint, during a
-
Culling Through 10,000 Emails Not Overly Burdensome Rules Court
In Broussard v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ. & A & M Coll., No. 19-527-BAJ-RLB (M.D. La. Sep. 28, 2020), Plaintiff moved to compel and for sanctions under FRCP 37 on the grounds that Defendants failed to produce certain emails, among other discovery. The lawsuit arose from Plaintiff’s
-
Spoliation Sanctions Motion Denied In Cruise Line Slip and Fall Case
In Hoover v. NCL, No. 19-22906 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 5, 2020), the District Court denied Plaintiff’s spoliation sanctions motion. Plaintiff was a passenger on a cruise ship operated by Defendant and slipped while walking down an outdoor stairway sustaining injuries. After the cruise, Plaintiff contacted Defendant’s claims division about her
-
Court Orders Litigation Hold Notice To Be Produced
In Radiation Oncology Servs. of Cent. N.Y., P.C. v Our Lady of Lourdes Mem. Hosp., Inc., EF15-462 (June 9, 2020 NY Supreme Court, Cortland County), Plaintiff’s motion for production of litigation hold was granted after making a preliminary showing of spoliation. The case arose from a dispute between the Plaintiff
-
Court Denies Spoliation Sanctions Where Party Failed to Satisfy Elements of FRCP 37(e)
In SHACKLEFORD v IVINT SOLAR DEVELOPER LLC, No. ELH-19-954 (D. Md. Jul. 2020), the District Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for spoliation sanctions where only bare-bones allegations were provided. The case arose from Plaintiff’s claim that Defendant violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Plaintiff alleged that one of Defendant’s salespersons appeared
-
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
-
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 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
-
Use Of Messaging App To Auto Delete Text Messages During Discovery Phase of Case Was In Bad Faith
In Herzig v. Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care, Inc., No. 2:18-CV-02101 (W.D. Ark. July 3, 2019), the Arkansas District Judge found that Plaintiffs acted in bad faith by using and “manually configuring [the messaging app] Signal to delete text communications” and by failing to disclose those deleted messages to Defendant.
-
Claw Back of Inadvertently Produced Data Permitted Despite Lack of Rule 502(d) Order
In Bellamy v. Wal-Mart Stores, Texas, LLC, No. SA-18-CV-60-XR (W.D. Tex. Aug. 19, 2019), a Texas District Judge ruled that Defendant was entitled to “claw back” certain documents it unintentionally produced. However, the Judge still considered the inadvertently produced documents in analyzing Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions and granted Plaintiff’s motion