-
In Deciding Spoliation Sanctions Motion, Court Determines if Police Defendants Intended to Destroy Cell Phones
In Dotson, et al. v. Edmonson, et al., No. 16-15371, (E.D. La. Jan. 22, 2018), the issue considered by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana was whether sanctions were warranted based upon claims of spoliation re phone records. Lyle Dotson, et al., (“Plaintiff”) moved for
-
In Sanctions Motion Based Upon Spoliation Claim, Plaintiff Claims Defendant Acted with Intent to Deprive Him of ESI
In Hernandez v. Tulare Correctional Center, et al., No. 1:16-cv-00413-EPG, (Dist. Court California, 2018), the Court was called upon to determine a request for sanctions based upon a spoliation claim. Albert Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) alleges that on April 21, 2015, he was pre-trial detainee at Tulare County Correctional Center (“Defendant”). Plaintiff
-
No Spoliation Sanctions Where Moving Party Offered No Proof of Intent
In Wooden v. Barringer, et al., No. 3:16-cv-446-MCR-GRJ, (N.D. Fla. Nov. 6, 2017), Gregory Wooden (“Plaintiff”) filed a grievance over excessive force against Officer Clyde Barringer (“Defendant”). Plaintiff filed a notice of intent to litigate on April 12, 2016. Defendants produced three video recordings. Plaintiff claimed spoliation, saying the videos
-
Court Retains Jurisdiction to Issue Sanctions Against Defendant City Fire Department for Spoliation of Evidence in Sexual Harassment Case
In Dena Lewis-Bystrzycki v. City of Country Club Hills, No. 2012 L 009916, (Cir. Ct. Cook County, 2017), the Court ordered sanctions against the Defendants (collective) City of Country Club Hills Fire Department after it became apparent that Defendants had wiped data from a network storage drive for computer backups
-
No New Trial in Case Where Court Imposed $5 Million Fine for Defendant’s Spoliation
In G.N. Netcom, Inc. v. Plantronics, Inc., No. 12-1318-LPS, (Dist. Ct. Del. 2017), Plaintiff, GN Netcom, Inc. (“GN”) moved for a new trial based on the court’s handling of issues relating to Defendant Plantronics’ spoliation of evidence. At trial, the court had ordered a permissive adverse inference, imposed financial sanctions of $5
-
Court Dismisses Case, Finding No Facts To Support Spoliation of Evidence
Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Progressive Casualty Ins. Co., No.3:16-cv-1574-J-34JBT, Dist. Court (M.D. FL 2017) involves preservation of Shawnta Braithwaite’s (“Braithwaite”) 2007 Acura following an accident that injured her and others. Braithwaite’s insurer, Progressive, took possession of the car. Braithwaite filed suit against ACME due to its negligent roadwork. Plaintiff Steadfast is
-
Court Denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Spoliation Sanctions When Evidence Requested Was Not Lost and Plaintiff Was Not Prejudiced By Deprivation of Information
In Barcroft Media, LTD. v. Coed Media Group, LLC, No. 16-cv-7634 Dist. Court (S.D.NY. 2017), Plaintiffs, providers of celebrity photographs, brought intellectual property claims against Defendants relating to use of certain celebrity photographs on Defendant’s pop culture and celebrity gossip websites. Plaintiffs filed a motion for spoliation sanctions pursuant to Rule
-
Court Demands Specificity in Motions to Compel Discovery
In Doctors Pathology Servs., PA v. Gerges, C.A. No 11457-CB (Del. Ch. Feb. 15, 2017), the court demanded that parties be specific as to which discovery requests were problematic, including providing specific numbers of discovery requests listed in the Motion to Compel. Here, Plaintiff had sued a former employee and
-
Court Grants Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence After Plaintiff Admits to Destroying a Journal Which Should Have Been Produced
In Mitcham v. Americold Logistics, LLC, No. 17-cv-00808-WJM-NYW (D. Colo. 2017), Plaintiff Kim Mitcham (“Plaintiff”) began working for Americold as a Human Resource Manager in October of 2015. Plaintiff claimed she was harassed and discriminated against by her supervisor, and filed a formal complaint against him with the “MySafeWorkplace” hotline.
-
Court Orders Adverse Inference Instruction Against District of Columbia For Failing to Preserve Potentially Relevant Emails
In Nunnally v. Dist. of Columbia, 243 F. Supp. 3d 55 (D.C. 2017), the Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions due to spoliation of evidence by Defendant. In 2004, Ronda Nunnally (“Nunnally”), a Lieutenant in the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department (“MPD”), filed a