Rahman v. The Smith & Wollensky Rest. Group, Inc., 2009 WL 773344 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2009)
Key Insight: Court found plaintiff?s objections to defendants? production in pdf format ?without merit? where plaintiff failed to specify the preferred format of production and where absent such specification ?pdf format?is presumptively a ?reasonably useable form?? and similarly dismissed plaintiff?s substantive complaints regarding the production upon its determination that there was sufficient information for plaintiff?s expert to perform an analysis; court also declined to reconsider denial of spoliation sanctions in light of ambiguous deposition testimony regarding a possible delay in the implementation of a litigation hold and noted the absence of evidence that the gap in production was attributable to such delay
Nature of Case: Employment discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: ESI