motion to compel
In this Title IX case involving an alleged rape by a third party, the court granted the defendant’s motion to compel in part. It ordered…
In this case, the court found that the defendants spoliated evidence but denied sanctions, finding neither prejudice nor an intent to deprive.
In this FMLA case, the court denied a request for forensic examination of the plaintiff’s devices, finding that it exceeded the scope of discovery.
The court granted a motion to compel, finding that disorganized ESI did not satisfy FRCP 34; it ordered amendment of all non-conforming productions.
In this FCRA case, the court granted a motion to compel in part and narrowed the scope of discovery, but held that some information was…
Despite being ordered to comply with FRCP 34, the plaintiffs continued to produce emails in PDF rather than native format, leading to sanctions.
In this trademark infringement case, the court ordered the defendants to review a random sample of documents using a code name for responsiveness.
The court compelled production of files in native format, citing Rule 34, the parties’ agreement, and the potential relevance of native-format files.
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.
The court rejected a party’s argument that his opponent’s shortcomings justified his own deficient discovery responses as a “playground tantrum.”
Citing FRCP 34 regarding the form of production, the court ordered a party to re-produce emails in native format rather than as searchable PDFs.