Search Articles By Category or Keyword

Latest Trends and eDiscovery Case Law

Posted on August 16th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

In Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Assoc., v. California Dept. of Educ., No. 2:11-cv-3471 KJM AC., (E.D. Cal. Feb 1, 2017), the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel native format production because Defendant, rather than timely filing objection to the requested format, instead proceeded to make production in a different format. Plaintiffs, two associations of parents …

Posted on August 14th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

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 Plaintiff was acting as a …

Posted on August 11th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

In United States District Court, E.D., California case Bird v. Wells Fargo Bank, (Case No. 1:16-cv-01130-DAD-EPG), Plaintiff Kimberly Sue Bird (“Plaintiff”) has filed a motion to compel and for sanctions contending in part that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank (“Defendant”) failed to comply with the Court’s March 31, 2017 discovery order. Specifically, that order required that …

Posted on August 9th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

The U.S. Northern District Court of Alabama, Southern Division,  examined this question regarding sanctions for spoliation of evidence in Jackson v. Haynes & Haynes, P.C., (Civil Action No. 2:16-cv-01297-AKK). Edna Jackson (“Jackson”) filed this lawsuit against her former employers, Haynes & Haynes, P.C. (“Haynes”) after working for them as a paralegal for three weeks, and …

Posted on August 8th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

Last year, we published a newsletter that provided practitioners a survey of case opinions re how courts adjudicated applications for adverse inference instructions sanctions based upon accusations of ESI/discovery spoliation. Since that newsletter was posted, additional opinions relative to this topic have issued, and so ILS is providing you this update.  Below are summaries of …

Posted on August 7th, 2017 by International Litigation Services

The United States District Court of Colorado reviewed singer Taylor Swift’s motion for sanctions in Mueller v. Swift (Civil Action No. 15-cv-1974-WJM-KLM). David Mueller (“Mueller”) sued Taylor Swift (“Swift”) and other defendants for tortious interference with his work contract. Swift counter-sued Mueller for allegedly groping her under her skirt at a radio station meet and …