Spoliation is a word that strikes fear into the hearts of corporate legal professionals.
Decker v. Target Corp. In this personal injury claim, the court granted harsh sanctions for the defendant’s bad faith spoliation of evidence.This case began with…
The plaintiff argued his medical records weren’t relevant; the court held that he “placed his mental condition at issue” by asserting an ADA claim.
In this negligence case arising from a car accident, the plaintiff moved to compel the production of daily driving reports.
In this alleged click-fraud case, the court concluded that a forensic inspection of the defendant’s devices was proportional to the needs of the case.
On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, finding that the plaintiff’s failure to provide discovery justified the “last resort” sanction of dismissal.
In this pharmaceutical case, the court ordered the parties to randomly sample the ESI null set for responsiveness after keyword searching.
In this contract claim, the court imposed the rare sanction of dismissal for the plaintiffs’ intentional spoliation and alteration of evidence.
In this fraudulent inducement claim, the magistrate considered the permissible scope of discovery for the parties’ cross-motions to compel.
In this trade secret theft case, the magistrate denied the plaintiff’s motion for a forensic inspection of the defendant’s computers.
In this TCPA claim, the court denied a forensic examination of the plaintiff’s cell phone, finding that no relevant evidence would be discovered.
The court denied spoliation sanctions as untimely when neither party discussed the loss of evidence until almost four years after it occurred.