Clik here to view.
Motion for Sanctions Denied for Automatic Deletion of Browsing History
In Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, No. 7:16-CV-18-D (ED NC June 7, 2017), Plaintiff sued Defendants Puma Biotechnology (“Puma”) and its CEO for libel per se and libel per quod based upon allegedly...
View ArticleCourt Defines Scope of Discovery in a Fraud Case by Allowing and Denying...
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...
View ArticleCourt Denies Plaintiff’s Request for His Entire PST File
In Russell v. Kiewit Corp., No. 18-2144-KHV (D. Kan. June 4, 2019), a Kansas Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s request to receive his entire e-mail personal storage (PST) file on the grounds that...
View ArticleClaw Back of Inadvertently Produced Data Permitted Despite Lack of Rule...
In Bellamy v. Wal-Mart Stores, Texas, LLC, No. SA-18-CV-60-XR (W.D. Tex. Aug. 19, 2019), a Texas District Judge ruled that Defendant was entitled to “claw back” certain documents it unintentionally...
View ArticleMeet And Confer Impasse Reached With “OK. File Motion to Compel” Response
In White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin., No. C19-0284-JCC (W.D. Wash. Feb. 14, 2020), a Washington judge granted Defendant’s motion to compel after finding that Plaintiff’s conduct and...
View ArticleIn Denying Forensic Exam, Court Rules that FRCP 34(a) Does Not Create A...
In The Ruby Slipper, LLC v. Belou, et al, No. 18-1548 (E.D. La April 6, 2020), Chief Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Supplemental Forensic Examination which sought to...
View ArticleMotion To Compel Granted Following Finding that Defendant’s Self Collection...
In EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. M1 5100 CORP., d/b/a JUMBO SUPERMARKET, INC., No. 9:19-cv-81320-WPD (S.D. Fla. 2020), the District Court granted, in part, Plaintiff’s motion to compel...
View ArticleCourt Defines Scope of Discovery in a Fraud Case by Allowing and Denying...
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...
View ArticleNative Production Ordered Under FRCP 34’s “Usual Course of Business” Requirement
In the absence of a specified production format provided in the request or agreed upon by the parties, Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 requires that electronically stored information (ESI) is produced as “kept in...
View ArticleCourt Denies Defense Request To Allocate Discovery Costs
In East Coast Test Prep, LLC, v. ALLNURSES.COM, Inc., et al., Civil No. 15-3705(JRT/ECW)(D. MN April 4, 2019), the United States District Court for Minnesota denied Defendant’s motion for a protective...
View ArticleJudge Orders Plaintiff To Produce His Telephone Records Citing Lack Of Viable...
In Siemers v. BNSF Railway Co., No. 8:17-cv-360 (D. Neb. Apr. 8, 2019), the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to produce his telephone records after finding that such records were not subject to a...
View ArticleJudge Rules That Defendant’s Objections To Discovery Were Untimely And...
In Thomas on Behalf of Estate of Thomas v. Bannum Place, Inc., No. 4:17-cv-13492 and No. 4:18-cv-10222 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 6, 2019), the Magistrate Judge granted and denied Plaintiff’s motion to compel...
View ArticleCourt Denies Plaintiff’s Request for His Entire PST File
In Russell v. Kiewit Corp., No. 18-2144-KHV (D. Kan. June 4, 2019), a Kansas Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff’s request to receive his entire e-mail personal storage (PST) file on the grounds that...
View ArticleMotion In Limine To Exclude Evidence of Plaintiffs’ Allegations of Spoliation...
In KIEFFABER v. ETHICON, Civil Action No. 20-1177-KHV (D. Kansas March 25, 2021), Defendants filed a motion in limine to exclude evidence of Plaintiffs’ allegations of Defendants’ spoliation. Despite...
View ArticleEvidence Of Defendants’ Intentional Destruction Of Encryption Keys Permitted...
In DOUBLELINE CAPITAL v. ODEBRECHT FINANCE, No. 17-CV-4576 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2021), a securities fraud lawsuit, Plaintiffs sought sanctions against Defendants, specifically, a mandatory adverse...
View ArticleMotion to Compel Production of Text Messages Granted
In SAGE PRODUCTS v. CHEMRITE COPAC, INC., No. 19 CV 5308 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 12, 2021) pending before the Court was a motion by Defendant ChemRite Copac, Inc., to compel Plaintiff, Sage Products, LLC, to...
View ArticleMotion To Permit Introduction of Spoliation Evidence At Trial Granted
In In Re: GOLD KING MINE RELEASE IN SAN JUAN COUNTY, COLORADO, No. 1:18-md-02824-WJ (D. NM Aug 6, 2021) before the Court was the Navajo Nation’s and the State of New Mexico’s (“Sovereign Plaintiffs)...
View ArticleNeither The Attorney-Client Privilege Nor Work-Product Doctrine Prohibits The...
In GINA VASOLI v. YARDS BREWING COMPANY, and TREVOR PRICHETT, Civil Action No. 21-2066 (E.D.P.A. Nov. 1, 2021), at issue was whether Defendants withheld ESI that would have been pertinent to...
View ArticleDefendants’ Motion to Compel Rigorous Social Media Discovery Searches From...
In In re: ZANTAC (RANITIDINE) PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, No. 20-MD-2924 (S.D. FL Nov. 15, 2021) Defendants served the 10 named Class Plaintiffs with Requests for Production and Interrogatories...
View ArticleDefault Judgment Recommended by Magistrate Judge Following Defendants’...
In STATE FARM MUTUAL, AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., v. MAX REHAB PHYSICAL THERAPY, LLC, ET AL., No.: 18-13257 (E.D. Mich. June 28, 2021), before the Magistrate Judge was the issue of Defendants’ repeated...
View Article