Tag:Adequacy of Search/Identification or Collection

1
Simpson v. J.L. Guess et al. (Middle District of Florida, 2020)
2
Shelton v. Fast Advance Funding, LLC (3rd Circuit, 2020)
3
Grande v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al (Western District of Washington, 2020)
4
White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin. (United States District Court, W.D. Washington, 2020)
5
Center for Auto Safety et al. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Arizona Court of Appeals, 2019)
6
United States v. Beverly (Fifth Circuit, 2019)
7
Shotwell, et al. v. Zillow Group Inc., et al. (Western Washington, 2019)
8
United States v. Norris (9th Circuit, 2019)
9
Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Company Limited v. FedEx Corporation, No. 19-5315 (US Court of Appeals 6th Circuit. , 2019)
10
Saulsberry v. Savannah River Remediation, LLC, (D. S.C., 2019)

Simpson v. J.L. Guess et al. (Middle District of Florida, 2020)

Key Insight: Proportionality need for records not related to the claim; Relevance; Access to records; Parties resources; Whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs it’s likely benefit

Nature of Case: Prisoner Pro Se – Unconstitutional use of excessive force by corrections officers

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy (discipline records/ Mail logs); collection

Keywords: Compel; Sanctions; Declaration of counsel; Malicious and sadistic purpose to inflict harm; State of Mind; Veracity; narrowed requests; meet and confer;

View Case Opinion

Shelton v. Fast Advance Funding, LLC (3rd Circuit, 2020)

Key Insight: defendant argued that it had no obligation to respond to timely discovery requests because the due date of the discovery was after the discovery deadline.

Nature of Case: telemarketing violation

Electronic Data Involved: requests for admission

Keywords: discovery deadline, requests for admission

View Case Opinion

Grande v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al (Western District of Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: Defendants here have not described any harm that would result from producing the guidelines and have not sought a protective order, the Court declines to find the documents so confidential that they cannot be produced

Nature of Case: bad faith and fraudulent banking

Electronic Data Involved: general discovery responses, voicemails, loan documents, loan history, and communications

Keywords: fraud, trade secrets, incomplete responses, bad faith

View Case Opinion

White v. Relay Res. & Gen. Servs. Admin. (United States District Court, W.D. Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: good faith effort, a reasonable effort to respond must be made, obstructive and dilatory

Nature of Case: employment discrimination

Keywords: vague broad objections, Failing to fully investigate the case is not an excuse from making initial disclosures

View Case Opinion

Center for Auto Safety et al. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Arizona Court of Appeals, 2019)

Key Insight: defendants perpetrated fraud and acted in bad faith when not disclosing test results of defective product

Nature of Case: product liability

Electronic Data Involved: product test results that were not disclosed

Keywords: fraud, bad faith, disclosure, confidentiality

Identified Local Court Rule(s): Maricopa county local practice rule 2.19, 5.4

Identified State Rule(s): 26(c)(1), 26(c)(1)(G), 26(c)(4)(A)

View Case Opinion

Shotwell, et al. v. Zillow Group Inc., et al. (Western Washington, 2019)

Key Insight: detailed stipulation of the discovery plan

Nature of Case: violation of the securities exchange act

Electronic Data Involved: all relevant discovery

Keywords: stipulation, discovery plan

View Case Opinion

United States v. Norris (9th Circuit, 2019)

Key Insight: Whether accessing a person’s information through an IP address being wired through an outside router is a violation of the 4 amendment

Nature of Case: criminal – possession and distribution of child pornography

Electronic Data Involved: IP address and location

Keywords: search and seizure, IP address, wireless router, subjective expectation of privacy

View Case Opinion

Abdul Latif Jameel Transportation Company Limited v. FedEx Corporation, No. 19-5315 (US Court of Appeals 6th Circuit. , 2019)

Key Insight: Whether the private arbitration panel in this case is considered a “foreign or international tribunal” and therefore whether discovery may be ordered under section 1782(a)

Nature of Case: contract dispute, application for arbitration discovery

Electronic Data Involved: arbitration discovery and “foreign or international tribunal”

Keywords: arbitration, ordered discovery, “foreign or international tribunal”

View Case Opinion

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.