Our Insights on eDiscovery

In Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, the Court, determining that the defendant had spoliated data, found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated sufficient facts to warrant striking the defendant’s affirmative defenses, but opted to order an adverse inference instruction and also ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs in preparing the instant motion for sanctions.

As we noted yesterday, Wednesday and Tuesday, eDiscovery Daily published 89 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 72 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to cooperation issues, social media and mobile phone discovery, technology assisted review and the first part of the cases relating to sanctions and spoliation. Today, let’s take a look back at the rest of the cases relating to sanctions and spoliation.

As we noted yesterday, eDiscoveryDaily published 89 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 72 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to admissibility and proportionality, production format disputes and (once again) the ubiquitous Apple v. Samsung case. Today, let’s take a look back at cases related to disputes about discovery, eDiscovery cost reimbursement and issues related to privilege and confidentiality assertions.

Did you think we forgot? No, we didn’t forget! It’s time for our annual review of eDiscovery case law! Once again, we had more than our share of sanctions granted and denied, as well as disputes over production formats, admissibility of electronically stored information (ESI) and even a dispute regarding whether contract review attorneys can receive overtime pay! So, as we have done for the last four years, let’s take a look back at eDiscovery case law in 2015!