eDiscovery Insights

eDiscovery Insights

Search
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
  • California Lawyers Association
  • California Consumer Privacy Act
  • CALBAR
  • E*D*R*M
  • CA Lawyer/Daily Journal
  • Charon Law
  • Annoying Legal Stuff
Cases of Interest, Duties, Law, Metadata, Sanctions, Technology

Case Got Your Tongue? “Don’t Tase Me, Bro!!!”

June 17, 2009 Perry L. Segal

J0315556 Here I go with my latest summary of lead cases I think are of interest.  When it comes to electronic devices that might be subject to e-discovery, I thought I'd thought of everything.  I was wrong…

Ford Motor Co. v. Edgewood Properties, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42001 (D.N.J. May 18, 2009)

USE IT OR LOSE IT – This is a classic example of where technical minds weren't properly involved from the outset of litigation and that lack of involvement resulted in a waiver.  The Defendant properly sought production of documents in native format with metadata intact.  The problem is, Plaintiff complied by delivering the documents in TIFF format.  Plaintiff waited six months to request the data again in native format and another two months to make a motion before the court.  The court deemed eight months too long and as a result, ruled Defendant waived its right to receive the documents in native format.

I admit I'm inserting my opinion here, but let's face it; the incoming data should have gone straight to a technical mind for immediate analysis.  A cursory review would have discovered the issue and Defendant could have addressed it within a reasonable time.  On the other hand, if Defendant knew about the issue and was simply tardy in addressing it, shame on them.

McGarry v. Becher, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40879 (S.D. Ind. May 13, 2009)

"DON'T TASE ME, BRO!!!" – This potential class-action criminal case may be summed up in one sentence.  The court ruled that memory from tasers is both discoverable and not burdensome on the Defendant.  Add tasers to your list of electronic devices!

1100 West v. Red Spot Paint and Varnish Co., 1:05-cv-1670-LJM-JMS (S.D. Ill. June 5, 2009)

KHARMA CHAMELEON – Don't waste any more time here.  Go directly to Ralph Losey's blog, e-Discovery Team (do not pass go and do not collect $200) and read his treatise on this case; the best post about attorney ethics – or lack thereof – I've seen in a long time!

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on google
Google
Share on linkedin
Linkedin
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

Post navigation

Previous PostLet’s Talk (Legal)Tech!Next Poste-Discovery California: AB 5: Hammer Time!

NEW YORK

Charon Law is technology partner to boutique litigation firm Leeds Brown Law P.C. of Long Island

CharonShield

Tags

  • 4th Amendment
  • ABA
  • ActiveSync
  • android
  • Apple
  • Blackberry
  • Blawg
  • Blog
  • Board of Trustees
  • Calbar
  • calbarlpmt
  • California
  • Cloud
  • Constitution
  • CSBS
  • eClassics
  • eDiscovery
  • EDRM
  • Ethics
  • Facebook
  • FBI
  • Google
  • Hotmail
  • ios
  • iPhone
  • Law
  • LegalTech
  • LegalTech West Coast
  • LPMT
  • LTWC
  • metadata
  • Microsoft
  • MySpace
  • NSA
  • privacy
  • SCOTUS
  • security
  • Social Media
  • Solo Summit
  • Spoliation
  • State Bar of California
  • Steve Jobs
  • Supreme Court
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo!

Law Practice Management and Technology Section

An IT Executive Turned Privacy, Cyber Security & Litigation Attorney and Consultant Shares his Personal Insights.

  • Litigation Hold Letter

January 2023
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
« Dec    

Follow me:

Archives

Categories

Blogroll

  • Above the Law
  • Bow Tie Law
  • CEBblog
  • e-Discovery Team
  • e-Lessons Learned
  • edd blog online
  • eDiscovery Times
  • Electronic Discovery Law
  • Information LawGroup
  • Inter Alia
  • Internship Rights
  • IT Law Today
  • ride the lightning

© 2008 - 2023 Charon Law.
All Rights Reserved.

Proudly powered by WordPress