Posts Tagged ‘caselaw’
hide story details [-]
- May 17th
-
Judge Peck Denies Plaintiffs’ Amicus Brief on Recusal
In Monique da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe and MSLGroup before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck denied on Monday an amicus curiae or friend-of-the-court brief filed in support of the plaintif…
posted at 11:57am on May 17th
- May 16th
-
Laura Zubulake: Keynote – Access Data Users’ Conference, 2012
Laura Zubulake was the keynote speaker on the second day of the Access Data Users’ Conference in Las Vegas. Just in case someone reading this ediscovery blog does not recognize the name “Zubulake”, her case is considered the foundation for the current rules of preservation for ediscovery. For the keynote address, Ms. Zubulake gave a high-level overview of her case, and the key motions. She said that most people that have written about her case actually know very little of what happened, and that the details would be available in her book, which is scheduled for release in June 2012. Ms. Zubulake said that her case was never about ediscovery… it was the result of discrimination and retaliation, and her persistence came from a desire for vindication, accountability and justice. In fact, her case happened during the “stone ages” of [...]
posted at 11:19am on May 16th
- May 15th
-
First BP Charges-Not the Crime But the Cover-up Again
The DOJ filed the first criminal indictment relating to the BP Horizon oil spill. It had nothing to do with the actual spill, but was actual criminal charges over an eDiscovery cover up. When something really bad happens, it is human nature to want it to just go away. Former BP engineer Kurt Mix seems to have fallen for the same temptation to try and make the evidence disappear as such well known offenders as Authur Andersen, President Nixon and Rupert Murdoch. Reportedly, Mr. Mix wiped approximately 200 relevant text messages from him smart phone after being notified that his ESI was scheduled for collection. His purported attempt to destroy key evidence in a federal investigation has elevated his role from witness to potential felon facing up to 20 years in jail. So far, the justice department has limited their wrath to Mr. Mix, but Mesa Airlines was found liable for a similar attempted destruction of ESI in In Re Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., Debtor. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., Plaintiff, vs. Mesa Air Group, Inc., Defendant Case No. 03-00817, Chapter 11, Adv. Pro. No. 06-90026, Re: Docket No. 373 United States Bankruptcy Court For The District Of Hawaii 2007 Bankr. Lexis 3679. I hope that this case raises awareness of the importance of documented preservation protocol, custodian communications, collection technology and compliance efforts. You want to be in a position to demonstrate that the eDiscovery team clearly communicated the external and internal consequences of non-compliance while making reasonable quality assurance efforts. “But your honor, we sent the executive the exact same preservation email every quarter for every case we have. Those notices are six pages of legalese that cover every contingency and ESI source. It’s not our fault that he panicked when we told him we were coming for his iPhone.” Let’s see how far that argument gets you.
posted at 10:20am on May 15th
- May 14th
-
Judge Peck Stays Defendant MSL Production in ‘Da Silva Moore’ – Law.com
Law.comJudge Peck Stays Defendant MSL Production in 'Da Silva Moore'Law.comThe case is being closely monitored by e-discovery professionals because of the court's approval of a protocol for e-discovery that was initially agreed to by the pa…
posted at 11:24pm on May 14th
-
Da Silva Moore: Plaintiffs File Reply in Support of Motion for Recusal or Disqualification
On May 10, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their reply in support of their motion for recusal or disqualification. Those pleadings are available below.
• Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification
• …posted at 1:19pm on May 14th
- May 9th
-
Twitter Seeks To Quash Order Requiring Production of Account Holder’s User Information, Tweets
People v. Harris, No. 2011NY080152 (N.Y. Crim. Ct.)
Following up on the case summary from last week (posted May 1, 2012) in which the court denied defendant’s motion to quash the District Attorney’s subpoena and issued an order req…posted at 2:36pm on May 9th
- May 8th
-
Are You Ready for the Next Step in Document Review Technology?
Adding to this week’s Da Silva’s appeal affirmation is the Circuit Court of Loudoun County, Virginia’s support of the use of predictive coding as a culling method for document review. In Global Aerospace, Inc. v. Landow Aviation, L.P., No. CL 61040 (Vir. Cir. Ct. Apr. 23, 2012), the Court approved the Defendant’s use of predictive coding to cull the asserted 250 gigabytes of reviewable data (about 2 million documents) for review and production. The court approved predictive coding over the objection of opposing counsel, a distinction between Landow and Judge Peck’s decision in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, 2012 …
[ CONTINUE READING → ]
posted at 2:01pm on May 8th
- May 7th
-
Predictive Coding Endorsed by the Southern District of New York – People plus technology equals smart search
Predictive Coding Endorsed by the Southern District of New York – People plus technology equals smart search "Attorneys should not agree to the use of predictive coding or other search…
posted at 4:22am on May 7th
- May 3rd
-
Judge rejects entire defense after spoliation
Virginia Lawyers Weekly published this article today . Goes to show that honesty and integrity an inttegral part off our justice system. In this lawsuit involving Safeway, Inc., (Garlick v. Safeway, Inc.), and the Virginia Supreme Cou…
posted at 11:54am on May 3rd
-
The Real Winners In Technology-Assisted Review Are…
It’s time to make a call: the biggest winner in Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) will be…wait for it…expert witnesses. For those of you not familiar with the role of an expert witness, according to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, “A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.” When TAR is involved, such an expert must understand software, review processes and approaches, and advanced statistics – a tall order that will likely lead to hourly rates of over $1,000 for those willing to appear in court and show off their knowledge.
posted at 9:00am on May 3rd