Inadvertent discovery disclosure is governed by Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26. It is not entirely uncommon for a paralegal, support staff or even attorneys to mistakenly produce documents or electronic data that is protected by attorney-client privilege. However, when it does happen, it can easily lead to ongoing disputes over the production. One such case is Woodward v. Victory
plaintiff esi production
- admin
- November 15, 2013
Court Disagreed that Plaintiff Metadata Reflected Attorney Misconduct
Can metadata steer parties in the wrong direction, or offer information that can be misconstrued or interpreted in the wrong way? This was a question in the case HSBC Bank USA v. Santana Cline, et al., Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00978 (S.D. Ohio October 25, 2013), where defendants alleged attorney misconduct arising from metadata in the
Read More
- admin
- August 12, 2013
Facebook Disclosure for 87 Class Action Plaintiffs? Federal Court Denies Discovery Request
Social media accounts, typically Facebook, are currently a hot-button issue for plaintiff ESI production in civil litigation. Most courts require a threshold showing that the public account has relevant information that would lead to discoverable evidence before requiring a plaintiff to produce private portions of the account. In an order dated July 19, 2013 in
Read More
- admin
- August 7, 2013
Can Plaintiffs Keep Facebook Profiles “Private” to Shield from eDiscovery?
“Postings on Facebook and other social media present a unique challenge for courts, due to their relative novelty and their ability to be shared by or with someone besides the original poster.” Such was the issue facing a district court in Higgins v. Koch Development Corporation, No. 3:11-cv-81-RLY-WGH(S.D.In. July 5, 2013). In its entry on
Read More
- admin
- July 1, 2013
Court Rejects Trend Requiring Threshold Showing for Plaintiff Social Media Accounts
As almost everyone is on social media sites, a common issue most plaintiffs will face in civil litigation is requests for production of information and electronic data regarding these sites. Not surprisingly, data from Facebook accounts, both the public and private portion, are commonly requested by defendants as part of the plaintiff ESI production. We
Read More
- admin
- April 22, 2013
District Court Chastises Defendant for Lack of eDiscovery Knowledge
Many lawyers now have a good understanding of electronic discovery law and technological advances, and the updated ABA model rules require this understanding to fulfill the ethical requirement of competence. For attorneys who lack this knowledge or who attempt to claim ignorance to evade discovery obligations should take note: courts will likely not stand for
Read More
- admin
- April 8, 2013
Deleted Facebook Account: Misunderstanding or eDiscovery Spoliation?
In the case Gatto v. United Air Lines, Inc., Civil Action No.: 10-cv-1090-ES-SCM (N.D.N.J. March 25, 2013), the court entered an order on the defendant’s Motion for Sanctions in a personal injury case. The defendants requested information from Gatto’s social media accounts as part of the plaintiff ESI production, served on July 21, 2011. On
Read More
- admin
- March 20, 2013
Court Grants Fees for Predictive Coding of Electronic Discovery
The case of Gabriel Technological Corporation v. Qualcomm Incorporated, 2013 WL 410103,(S.D.Cal.) was an exceptional case where the court determined that plaintiffs’ “frivolous claims” in a patent lawsuit (where among others, plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the rightful inventors of the patents at issue) warranted sanctions and cost shifting. Having prevailed in the lawsuit,
Read More
- admin
- February 20, 2013
District Court: Email is Obvious and Critical Source of Information
On Monday, our blog reviewed a federal district court case Branhaven, LLC v. Beeftek, Inc., et al., Civ. No. WDQ-2334 (D. Md. 2013). In the case, after five months, plaintiff produced electronic data that consisted of 112,106 documents three days before oral depositions were scheduled. Although plaintiff offered some excuses for the delay, mainly that
Read More
- admin
- February 18, 2013
Another Cautionary Tale: Retain an eDiscovery Vendor Before Its Too Late
In the federal district court case Branhaven, LLC v. Beeftek, Inc., et al., Civ. No. WDQ-2334 (D. Md. 2013), the Court addressed the issue of delayed and inadequate plaintiff ESI production. The opinion is a ruling on defendant’s Motion for Sanctions, alleging that the plaintiff engaged in “discovery abuses intended to harass defendants, cause unnecessary
Read More