-
Motion for Sanctions Denied for Automatic Deletion of Browsing History
In Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, No. 7:16-CV-18-D (ED NC June 7, 2017), Plaintiff sued Defendants Puma Biotechnology (“Puma”) and its CEO for libel per se and libel per quod based upon allegedly defamatory statements regarding a clinical trial scandal in February of 2016. Defendant Puma is a bio-pharmaceutical company focused
-
Even Without Ill Intent, Plaintiff’s Failure to Preserve ESI on Cell Phone Still Leads to Sanctions
In Montgomery v. Iron-Rooster Annapolis, LLC., Civil No. RDB-16-3760 (D. Md. May 9, 2017) the Plaintiff sued her former employer for unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law. She was employed from March of 2015 to March of 2016. Defendants claimed that
-
Law Firm Defendant Sanctioned for Negligent Destruction of ESI
In DiStefano v. Katsos et. al., Case No. 11-2893 (E.D. N.Y., May 10, 2017), Plaintiff business owners hired Defendant lawyer Katsos to advise them regarding their financial difficulties, including how to establish a trust to protect their personal assets from business creditors and how to negotiate with creditors. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant’s
-
Adverse Inference Instruction Ordered for ESI Spoliation Outside the Scope of FRCP 37(e)
In United States ex. rel. Scutellaro v. Capitol Supply, Inc., Case No. 10-1094 (District of Columbia, Apr. 19, 2017), the relator, Louis Scutellaro, sued Defendant under the qui tam provision of the False Claims Act (FCA). The suit alleged that Defendant falsely certified that its products sold to federal agencies
-
Re Deleted Audio Recording, Court Unpersuaded FRCP 37(e) Applied-Intentional Spoliation Found and Sanctions Ordered Instead
In Hsueh v. New York State Dept. of Financial Services et. al., Case No. 15-03401 (S.D. N.Y., Mar. 31, 2017), Plaintiff sued her former employer, a New York State government department (“Department”), and a Department former co-worker. Plaintiff alleged that the co-worker, Abraham Guevara, sexually harassed her and that the Department
-
Defendant Ordered to Pay for Plaintiff’s Forensic Examination of Hard Drive
In TLS Management and Marketing Services, LLC v. Rodriguez-Toledo, et. al., Case No. 15-2121 (D. P.R., Mar. 27, 2017), Plaintiff sued Defendants for violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and various Puerto Rico statutes. Defendant Rodriguez-Toledo is a former employee of Plaintiff who allegedly, with the other defendants, stole
-
NYPD Motion for Sanctions Denied When No Prejudice Shown by Lost Cell Phone Footage
In Simon et. al. v. City of New York et. al., Case No. 14-8391 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 5, 2017), Plaintiffs sued the City of New York as well as several NYPD police officers for false arrest and violations of the First, Fourth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. After discovery,
-
Amended FRCP 37(e) Imposes Higher Culpability for ESI Spoliation Sanctions in 2016 Case Law
In December 2015, the Amended Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. One of the updated amendments included FRCP 37(e), Failure to Preserve Electronically Stored Information. The amendment raised the requisite intent to have the court order spoliation sanctions, including an adverse inference instruction and terminating sanctions. Attorney fees
-
Defendant Seeks FRCP 37(e) Sanctions for Lost Call Center Recordings
In Security Alarm Financing Etnerprises, L.P. v. Alarm Protection Technology, LLC et. al., Case No. 13-00102 (D. Alaska, Dec. 6, 2016), Plaintiff, a home security company, sued Defendants, also home security companies, alleging that Defendants had illegally poached customers and also alleging defamation. Defendants filed a counterclaim alleging tortious interference
-
Plaintiff’s Motion for ESI Spoliation Sanctions Denied Without Prejudice Pending Further Discovery
In Konica Minolta Business Solutions, USA Inc. v. Lowery Corporation d/b/a Applied Imaging Systems, Inc. et. al., Case No. 15-11254 (E.D. Mich., Aug. 31, 2016), Plaintiff sued Defendants (several former employees and their new employer, Lowery Corporation (“Lowery”), for unlawful taking of property and disclosure of confidential materials and trade