Search Articles By Category or Keyword

eDiscovery

Posted on June 18th, 2018 by ilsteam

In Winfield v. City of New York (Case No. 15-cv-05236, (S.D.N.Y. May 10, 2018), New York Magistrate Judge Katherine H. Parker denied Plaintiff’s request to take a “quick” look at Defendant’s 3,300-page privilege log. Instead, the judge ordered that a special master review the documents. Winfield involves plaintiffs who are seeking redress for alleged discrimination in …

Posted on June 4th, 2018 by ilsteam

In TMJ Group, LLC v. IMCMW Holdings, Plaintiff TMJ Group, LLC claims that Defendant IMCMV Holdings fraudulently induced it to make investments in two Margaritaville restaurants. Plaintiff argues that it obtained financing for these investments from First NBC Bank (FNBC). According to Plaintiff, IMCMV Holdings altered financial statements so that FNBC would approve the financing. Under …

Posted on May 18th, 2018 by ilsteam

In Davis v. Electronic Arts, Inc., No. 10-cv-03328-RS-DMR, (N.D. California, April 3, 2018), the United States District Court Northern Division California determined Plaintiffs had failed to comply with Court’s discovery order in a timely fashion. Plaintiffs Michael Davis, Vince Ferragamo, and Billy DuPree, et al. (“Plaintiffs”), sued Electronic Arts, Inc. (“EA”) for misappropriating their images …

Posted on May 14th, 2018 by ilsteam

In Shenwick v. Twitter, Inc., No. 16-cv-05314-IST, (N.D. California, Feb. 7, 2018), a securities class action filed on behalf of certain persons who bought or acquired common stock of Twitter, Inc. (“Twitter”) in 2015, the magistrate judge resolved several ESI-related discovery disputes. First, the parties disagreed regarding the scope of custodians. The parties agreed that …

Posted on May 11th, 2018 by ilsteam

In Klipsch Grp., Inc. v. ePRO E-Commerce Ltd., Nos. 16-3637-cv, 16-3726-cv (2d Cir. Jan. 25, 2018), the Second Circuit found no error in the lower court’s imposition of a multi-million sanction for discovery misconduct. While defending against claims it sold counterfeit products, ePRO E-Commerce Limited (“Defendant”) engaged in persistent discovery misconduct. It did not disclose …