Tagged with: plaintiff ediscovery

Subscribe

Recent Posts

May 18th, 2018

Court Imposes $25K in Sanctions for Failure to Comply with Court’s Discovery Order in NFL Video Game Case

May 16th, 2018

Court Denies Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence Due to Lack of Intentional Destruction

May 14th, 2018

Magistrate Judge Rules on ESI Disputes in Twitter Securities Class Action

  • Categories

  • ILS Newsletters

    • Latest Trends and eDiscovery Case Law Newsletters
    • Latest Trends and eDiscovery Case Law Newsletters

    Posted on February 26th, 2014 by

    Would the Proposed Amendment Harm Plaintiff eDiscovery? As of February 18, 2014, the public comments to the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are now closed (extended from the original deadline of the 15th). One particularity controversial proposed amendment is regarding Rule 37(e). Plaintiff trial attorneys and in-house corporate defense counsel are currently …

    No Comments
    • Strategic eCertainty

    Posted on December 5th, 2013 by

    In RPM Pizza, LLC v. Argonaut Great Central Insurance Company, No. 10-684-BAJ-SCR (Dist. Court, M.D. Louisiana Nov. 15, 2013), plaintiff RPM Pizza (doing business as Domino’s) sued defendant Argonaut for payment on an insurance claim. RPM Pizza was accused of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and they expected Argonaut to provide defense costs under …

    No Comments
    • Strategic eCertainty

    Posted on December 3rd, 2013 by

    In Rick James, et al. v. UMG Recordings, Inc., No. 11-cv-01613-SI (MEJ) (Dist. Court, N.D. California Nov. 8, 2013), plaintiff, the estate of the late singer Rick James, alleges defendant UMG Recordings, Inc. underpays licensing royalties for digital downloads of recordings. The plaintiff eDiscovery requests sought Excel-versions of electronic documents from defendant calculating royalties, but …

    No Comments
    • FRCP

    • Latest Trends and eDiscovery Case Law

    • Strategic eCertainty

    Posted on December 1st, 2013 by

    In Home Instead, Inc. v. Florance, No. 8:12CV264 (Dist. Court, D. Nebraska Nov. 8, 2013), plaintiff Home Away alleged defendant Florance violated a non-compete agreement, took trade secrets and used licensed marks of Home Away without permission. Florance operated a franchise under Home Away for fifteen years. During depositions, Florance testified to discarding evidence that …

    No Comments
    • FRCP

    • Latest Trends and eDiscovery Case Law

    • Strategic eCertainty

    Posted on November 29th, 2013 by

    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 …

    No Comments