Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26(b)(1)
In this EEO case, the court quashed a deposition of the city’s mayor where the plaintiff failed to show his testimony was relevant or proportional.
In trade secret theft case, Nachurs Alpine Sols. Corp. v. Banks, the court refused request to shift costs to review withheld documents as disproportional.
In this illegal discrimination case, defendant Genpact avoids sanctions by issuing proper litigation holds and guiding custodians through ESI search.
In this breach of contract and tortious interference case, the court partially granted and partially denied First American Bank's discovery request.
In this proposed class action, the court granted a motion compelling the defendant to produce e-discovery data to define the class of potential plaintiffs.
In Gordon v. T.G.R. Logistics, Inc., the court struck a balance when ordering discovery of social media posts. Get details in this Zapproved case summary.
First Niagara Risk Mgmt., Inc. v. Folino, No. 16-1779 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 11, 2016). The court concluded that the plaintiff’s requested scope of discovery from…
Citing proportionality, court grants protective order and prohibits a subpoena request after overly broad discovery request.
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts remarks on amended Rule26(b)(1) and common sense proportionality.
And So It Begins: Court Hopes for Change in Mindset Under Amended Rule 26(b)(1) in Gilead v. Merck Ruling
Court strives to enforce proportionality guidelines under amended Rule 26(b)(1), the intellectual property dispute alleges infringement of patents for a nucleoside.