What do applications like Snapchat, Telegram, Wickr, Cover Me, Speak On, and Whisper have in common? They are all self-destructing message (“SDM”) applications. What exactly does this mean, you ask? Self-destructing messaging applications transmit information with end-to-end encryption, and auto destruct after a set time period of time, or after receipt and access by the intended recipient. Consider Snapchat, for
Continue Reading The Perks and Perils of Self-Destructing Messages
Litigation Hold Notices Should Not Cloak the Recipient With Discretion Over What Documents to Preserve
In past blogs, I have discussed the importance of issuing a litigation hold notice (“Hold”), as soon as a litigation is reasonably anticipated. I have also written about various best practices when drafting one’s Hold. [See Practical Tips For an Effective Litigation Hold Notice and Your Litigation Hold Must be Generally Broad And Specifically Tailored]. In an effort
Continue Reading Litigation Hold Notices Should Not Cloak the Recipient With Discretion Over What Documents to Preserve
In the SDNY, a Party Is Sanctioned for the Preservation Failures of a Third-Party
Ronnie Van Zant, Inc. v. Pyle, No. 17 Civ. 3360 (RWS), 2017 WL 3721777 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2017)
In this case, the Southern District of New York imposed an adverse inference against defendants for their failure to preserve text messages that were in the possession of a non-party. Specifically, Judge Sweet imposed an adverse inference against defendants based
Continue Reading In the SDNY, a Party Is Sanctioned for the Preservation Failures of a Third-Party
Practical Tips For an Effective Litigation Hold Notice
I recently wrote about the importance of styling one’s litigation hold in a broad, but sufficiently specific way (See, “Your Litigation Hold Must be Generally Broad and Specifically Tailored”). Some of you may be thinking, well, that’s all fine and good but what is a litigation hold? Why and when do I need one? And what should
Continue Reading Practical Tips For an Effective Litigation Hold Notice
Your Litigation Hold Must be Generally Broad And Specifically Tailored
In Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., No. 7:16-CV-18-D (E.D.N.C. June 7, 2017), Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr., denied Plaintiff Eshelman’s motion seeking a jury instruction in response to Puma Biotechnology Inc.’s (“Puma”) failure to preserve (or identify in its litigation hold notice the need to preserve) internet web browser and search histories. In denying Eshelman’s request, Judge Jones
Continue Reading Your Litigation Hold Must be Generally Broad And Specifically Tailored
Taylor Swift and the Java-Dump: An E-Discovery Tale
Mueller v. Swift, (D. Col. 2017) 2017 WL 2362137
Some opinions just have it all, and Mueller v. Swift does not disappoint! Indeed, in this lawsuit, Taylor Swift, the pop sensation who has been sweeping the nation, alleges she was the victim of sexual misconduct, assault, and battery.
What in the world do such allegations have to do with
Continue Reading Taylor Swift and the Java-Dump: An E-Discovery Tale
Critical Road Map for ESI in Litigation
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.
Preserving vs. Collecting – What’s the Difference? And, Why Does it Matter?
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?
Failure to Preserve Emails Results in Sanctions
We all know that it can be damaging to one’s case if a party to a litigation fails to preserve relevant information. But when, exactly, does one’s duty to preserve (potentially relevant information) arise? And what type of sanctions are federal courts imposing under the amended federal rules for preservation failures?
When Does One’s Duty to Preserve Arise?
Different jurisdictions
Continue Reading Failure to Preserve Emails Results in Sanctions
Lightning Strikes and Power Surges Insufficient to Insulate Defendant from Discovery Sanctions
In a trademark infringement case pending in the Northern District of California (InternMatch v. Nxtbigthing, 2016 WL 491483 [N.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2016]), plaintiff requested copies of any documents relating to the defendants’ defense that it had continually and pervasively used the trademark at issue. The defendants were not able to produce many responsive documents and advised