Remove Discovery Remove Evidence Remove Litigation
article thumbnail

Google Avoids Discovery on Discovery Based on Insufficient Foundation for Request

E-Discovery LLC

Boyers (or anyone elses) chat messages contain relevant evidence that was not properly preserved, and thus there is no justification for an order requiring Google to run the search terms plaintiffs propose through the documents collections for all Google custodians and witnesses. In my opinion, that omission was dispositive almost by itself.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Self-Collection, Discovery About Discovery, and Curative Sanctions

E-Discovery LLC

Among them were: general principles of discovery; the role of counsel in self-collection; discovery on discovery; the date that the litigation hold was triggered; whether reasonable post-trigger steps were taken; curative sanctions under Fed.R.Civ.P. It insists that it is not conducting unchecked discovery.”

Discovery 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Two Recent Decisions Imposing Sanctions for Discovery Failures

E-Discovery LLC

26, 2024)(unreported), dismissals for discovery violations were affirmed. Nguh, one owner, propounded discovery on Mr. Etame, the opposing owner. The Appellate Court wrote: Mr. Etame failed to respond to discovery, and on March 3, 2022, Ms. Etame appealed, arguing abuse of discretion in the imposition of discovery sanctions.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Divorce Complaint Stricken and Testimony Precluded as Discovery Sanction

E-Discovery LLC

June 28, 2024)(unreported), the intermediate appellate court affirmed a discovery sanction in a divorce action. Mrs. Ferko alleged that Mr. Ferko’s discovery responses were inadequate on the issue of marital property. Ferko then filed two more motions to compel asserting that the discovery responses were deficient.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Discovery Dispute: “Both cannot be true.”

E-Discovery LLC

When it came to discovery, it wasn’t. Tekvantage and Teknowledgies are not parties to this litigation. RFP 1: “NO SUCH DOCUMENTS EXIST” Generally, when an attorney signs a discovery response under Fed.R.Civ.P. Discovery is the Lawyer’s X-Ray; However, an MRI May Not Be Reasonable (Sep. Lain also owned Tekvantage, Inc.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

Discovery is the Lawyer’s X-Ray; However, an MRI May Not Be Reasonable

E-Discovery LLC

29, 2024), rejected “oceanic” discovery requests, while permitting reasonable ones. The court wrote: “Not surprisingly, discovery in this case, like ‘the course of true love, [has been anything but] smooth.’ Subrin, “Fishing Expeditions Allowed: The Historical Background of the 1938 Federal Discovery Rules,” 39 B.C. Rodriguez v.

Discovery 130
article thumbnail

E-Discovery 101 – – A Refresher on the Scope of Discovery + Boilerplate Objections Sustained

E-Discovery LLC

9, 2024), provides a succinct summary of the scope of discovery under the December 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Information within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.” It – surprisingly – sustained boilerplate objections. The case involved a loan gone south.

Discovery 130