Our Insights on eDiscovery

Read on to learn more about the latest trends and insights in the world of digital discovery.

Defendant Not Required to Modify Production After Plaintiff Fails to Demonstrate Prejudice: eDiscovery Case Law

In Excel Enterprises, LLC v. Winona PVD Coatings, LLC, Indiana Magistrate Judge Michael G. Gotsch, Sr. ruled that despite the fact that the defendant failed to demonstrate that it produced documents kept in the ordinary course of business, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate any prejudice suffered from the current state of the production and granted the defendant’s motion to reconsider the court’s earlier order regarding the format of the defendant’s production.

read more

Requesting 72 Spelling Variations on Five Search Terms Spells Trouble for Plaintiffs: eDiscovery Case Law

In Diesel Power Source et. al. v. Crazy Carl’s Turbos et. al., Utah Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells denied the plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions for the failure of the defendant to produce ESI, finding that the plaintiff had failed to sufficiently narrow its search terms by introducing 72 spelling variations on the five terms it proposed. Judge Wells also denied the defendants’ Motion for Order to Show Cause and for Sanctions, finding that the defendants had failed to provide any “certification that the parties made reasonable efforts to reach agreement on the disputed matters.”

read more

78 is Great! eDiscovery Daily Is Seventy Eight! (Months Old, That Is)

A new record! (Get it?) Seventy eight months ago today (a.k.a., 6 1/2 years), eDiscovery Daily was launched. Twice a year, we like to take a look back at some of the important stories and topics during that time. So, here are just a few of the posts over the last six months you may have missed. Enjoy!

read more

Defendant Ordered to Reproduce ESI in Native Format, As Originally Requested by Plaintiffs: eDiscovery Case Law

In Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Assoc. v. California Dept. of Education, California Magistrate Judge Allison Claire granted the plaintiffs’ motion to compel the defendant to produce emails in native format with all metadata attached, but denied the plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions without prejudice to its renewal using Sacramento rates for attorneys’ fees. Judge Claire also denied the defendant’s motion for a protective order regarding production of the native format data, and its motion for sanctions.

read more