E-Discovery Law Blog

Category: Proportionality

Mar 22 2010

Two Prominent Federal Judges Issue Opinions for Determining Sanctions

Since January 11, 2010, two prominent federal judges issued opinions detailing the analytical framework for deciding whether to impose sanctions for the spoliation of electronic evidence.
 
Pension Committee of Univ. of Montreal v. Banc of America Sec, LLC, et. al., 2010 WL 184312 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2010) (Amended Order), was a decision issued by Judge Shira Scheindlin on January 11, 2010.  Judge Scheindlin’s opinion was titled “Zubulake Revisited: Six Years Later” and outlined an analytical framework for imposing severe sanctions for discovery failures.
 
Respected jurist Judge Lee Rosenthal reinforced this framework in an opinion she issued in Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. v. Cammarata, H-07-0405 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 19, 2010); however, she took a different approach than Judge Scheindlin in analyzing the culpability level necessary for imposing sanctions for preservation failures.

Read more...

Posted by John Rosenthal at 4:42 PM - Categories: Proportionality | Judge Shira A. Scheindlin | Spoilation | Judge Lee Rosenthal | Case Law

5 comments

Dec 10 2009

Advocating Proportionality? Study the Case Law!

A high percentage of recent e-discovery decisions turn on the failure of the parties to discuss and address issues early on in litigation.  Whether the dispute involves the appropriateness of keyword searching, form of production, or the scope of discovery, judges are responding with a largely uniform theme:  do not bring me disputes that could have (and should have) been addressed by meaningful discussions that the rules envision (and require) the parties to have.

Read more...

Posted by Gil Keteltas at 11:44 AM - Categories: Proportionality | Case Law

1 comments

Nov 24 2009

Advocating Proportionality? Start with the Rules!

You are preparing to advocate a proportional approach to discovery in your case, including informed limits on the information that will be preserved, collected, reviewed and produced.  But your opponent and the court are new to e-discovery in major litigation, and your opponent has resisted a meaningful early discussion of the myriad issues “that deserve attention during the discovery planning stage” (including scope of preservation and discovery, sources of ESI that will and will not be searched, burden and cost, and procedures for asserting privilege claims).  Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) advisory committee’s note (2006). 

Read more...

Posted by Nicole Steckman at 2:01 PM - Categories: Proportionality

2 comments

Categories

Monthly Archives

Search Archives

Pages