In this employment case, the court sanctioned the plaintiff for destroying cell phone records and lying under oath.
Sign up for our news digest
Results for: employment
Plaintiff cannot shield cell phone records that his claim makes relevant
Ortiz v. Amazon.com LLC, No. 17-cv-03820-JSW (MEJ) (N.D. Cal. May 25, 2018). In this employment dispute, the court concluded that the plaintiff lacked possession or control over the cell phone account listed in his wife’s name. However, it chastised the plaintiff’s...
A rare intentional spoliation tort case further restricts the claim’s scope
Elliott-Thomas v. Smith, No. 2017-0693, Slip Op. No. 2018-Ohio-1783 (Ohio May 8, 2018). Ohio, one of the few states recognizing an independent tort for intentional spoliation, has drawn a bright line limiting the claim to destruction or alteration of evidence. This...
Request Quashed: No Proof of Proportionality
Hurd v. City of Lincoln, No. 4:16-CV-3029, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210104 (D. Neb. Dec. 21, 2017). In this employment discrimination and retaliation case, the plaintiff sought to depose the defendant City’s mayor. The court granted the City’s motion to quash that...
Court Orders Specific Discovery After Complete ‘Breakdown’ Between Parties
Bird v. Wells Fargo Bank, No. 16-1130 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2017). In this case, the discovery process broke down so completely that the court ordered specific discovery. It also prohibited the parties from conferring further about the scope of production. This...
Sign up for our news digest