In this data privacy class action, the court denied the defendant’s request to inspect the plaintiffs’ mobile devices.
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.
What is cooperation in ediscovery? Learn why collaborative ediscovery is required by the FRCP, how it controls costs, and why preparation is critical.
In this fraudulent inducement claim, the magistrate considered the permissible scope of discovery for the parties’ cross-motions to compel.