Armstrong Pump, Inc. v. Hartman, No. 10-CV-446S, 2016 WL 7208753 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2016)
In this case, pending before the Court was a motion by Armstrong Pump Inc. (“Armstrong”) to compel formal production of certain documents that defendant Optimum Energy LLC (“Optimum”) considered the functional equivalent of its proprietary source code. This “formal production” Armstrong sought to compel consisted of
Continue Reading The Western District Declines to Compel Additional Discovery
It is the beginning of a new year and I thought it the ideal time to list out those steps that are absolutely critical when an attorney is confronting his/her obligation to produce e-discovery in connection with a litigation. Bear in mind, the below list is not exhaustive and each step is replete with technical and tactical sub-steps and decisions.
When collecting electronically stored information (“ESI”) from multiple custodians (i.e., various individuals/ different sources), there will necessarily be duplicative documents collected in the process. In company-wide e-mail chains, for example, a message is sent to multiple recipients and stored within each recipient’s mailbox. Consider the following: I send an email to two colleagues; a copy of the very same email
In Arrowhead Capital Fin. Ltd. v. Seven Arts Entertainment, Inc. 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126545 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2016), District Judge Katherine Polk Failla imposed significant sanctions upon both the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and the lawyer for defendant Seven Arts Entertainment Inc. (“SAE”).
Arrowhead Capital Finance, Ltd. (“Arrowhead”) sued SAE in 2014 seeking to enforce a judgment
Continue Reading Client’s Bad Behavior Imputed to Counsel – Both Get Sanctioned
A key word search is a basic search technique that involves searching for one or more words within or across a collection of documents/files. Typically, the purpose of a key word search in a litigation is to limit the universe of potentially responsive data that one must process and review in order to prosecute/defend a lawsuit. (Note, this blog relates
Continue Reading Key Word Searching – What Is It? And How Do I Do It (Well)?
Lawyers often worry about their obligation to preserve relevant information. As a result, one may direct their client to collect all potentially responsive information. However, over-collecting is a significant cause of costly e-discovery. So, what is a lawyer to do?
It is critical not to conflate preservation and collecting.
While collecting is one way to preserve information, it is a
Continue Reading Preserving vs. Collecting – What’s the Difference? And, Why Does it Matter?
The amendment to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) (which defines the scope of permissible discovery) did away with the timeworn “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” standard. In its place is now the “proportionality standard,” which explicitly imposes a responsibility on litigants to tailor their discovery requests to account for the significance of the information
Continue Reading Proportionality Is the Critical Inquiry in Federal Court Discovery
On October 4, 2016, District Judge Jon S. Tigar issued an opinion every federal court practitioner should read (Rodman v Safeway, Inc., [11-cv-03003] [N.D. Ca.] [JST]). The decision serves as an important reminder that counsel has an obligation to assist their client when identifying and collecting electronic documents responsive to discovery demands. Indeed, it is not sufficient or defensible
Continue Reading Counsel’s Failure to be Meaningfully Involved with Client’s Discovery Collection Costs Client One Half Million Dollars in Discovery Sanctions
In Hyles v. New York City et. al., (Case No. 10-3119, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100390 [S.D.N.Y. Aug. 1, 2016], the plaintiff, an African-American female employed by the City of New York, was demoted. Specifically, she was replaced by a white male and demoted to a different position with a lesser salary. Ultimately, plaintiff sued the City for discrimination
This case (Heller’s Gas, Inc. v. Int’l Ins. Co. of Hannover Ltd., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71069 [M.D. Pa. June 1, 2016]), arises from an insurance claim filed by Heller’s Gas Inc. (“Heller”). Heller was issued a commercial output insurance program property insurance policy by defendants International Insurance Company of Hannover LTD and International Insurance Company of Hannover
Continue Reading A Party Must Specify Basis for Objection Or Risk Compelled Discovery