e-Lawyering Jordan Khan Music Co. v. Taglioli (E.D. Tex. 2022) May 12, 2022 by Robertson Noreus Key Insight: Plaintiffs moved to compel the forensic examination of defendants’ devices and data storage for imaging and inspection, along with their licenses for all software used for their businesses. Plaintiffs claimed the discovery was releva... Read more » CASE SUMMARIES Forensic Examination Forensic Imaging FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope Defined by Relevance and Proportionality (effective Dec. 1 FRCP 34(b) Procedure or Format FRCP 37(a)(1) Motion to Compel Proportionality
e-Lawyering Aminov v. Berkshire Hathaway Guard Insurance Companies (E.D.N.Y. 2022) March 3, 2022 by Robertson Noreus Key Insight: Defendant moved to compel plaintiff to produce for forensic examination the cell phone that recorded videos produced by Plaintiff. The court denied the motion, noting there must be good cause to order forensic examination when a party has ... Read more » CASE SUMMARIES Forensic Examination FRCP 34(b) Procedure or Format Metadata Motion to Compel
e-Lawyering Axis Insurance Company v. American Specialty Insurance & Risk Services, Inc. (N.D. Ind. 2021) July 12, 2021 by Robertson Noreus Key Insight: Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel sought missing documents and communications from, and the correction of metadata “issues” from Defendant and its parent company (via third party subpoena), and sought an award of attorney’s fees and costs. The ... Read more » Breach of Contract CASE SUMMARIES Data Preservation Fees and Costs FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope in General (effective Dec. 1, 2015) FRCP 34(b) Procedure or Format FRCP 45 Third Party Subpoenas Liability Insurance Metadata Missing Documents Motion to Compel Other Federal Rule(s) of Civil Procedure and/or Evidence Rule: FRCP 26(f) Other Federal Rule(s) of Civil Procedure and/or Evidence Rule: FRCP 34(a) Other Federal Rule(s) of Civil Procedure and/or Evidence Rule: FRCP 37(c) Parent Company Privilege or Work Product Protections Proportionality
e-Lawyering Allen v. PPE Casino Resorts Maryland, LLC (D. Md. 2021) June 14, 2021 by Robertson Noreus Key Insight: Plaintiffs sought a protective order to prevent defendant from obtaining ESI from five different social media platforms they were active on. The court found that while a plaintiff’s social media postings could be relevant to a claim for “g... Read more » CASE SUMMARIES Cost Shifting Data Privacy Emotional Distress Damages Format Of Production FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope Defined by Relevance and Proportionality (effective Dec. 1 FRCP 26(c) Protective Orders FRCP 34(b) Procedure or Format Motion for Protective Order Other Federal Rule(s) of Civil Procedure and/or Evidence Rule: FRCP 26(g) Proportionality Social Media Text Message