Plaintiff Ordered to Image its Sources of ESI, Respond to Disputed Discovery Requests: eDiscovery Case Law

By: Doug Austin

In Electrified Discounters, Inc. v. MI Technologies, Inc. et al., Connecticut Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez granted the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff 's responses to discovery and ordered the plaintiff to “image its sources of electronically stored information (‘ESI’), including its hard drives and QuickBook files”.

Think Before You Hit Send (Unless You’re On Gmail and are Really Fast): eDiscovery Trends

By: Doug Austin

Let’s face it, people make mistakes. However, a new feature from Google may help people who make those mistakes avoid the consequences – if they’re quick to address them.

Time for Another “Mashup” of eDiscovery Market Estimates: eDiscovery Trends

By: Doug Austin

Rob Robinson’s Complex Discovery site is an excellent resource for discovery and general legal technology articles which we’ve profiled several times before. In the past two years, we have covered his compilations of various eDiscovery market estimates for 2012 to 2017 and for 2013 to 2018. Now, he has released his worldwide eDiscovery software overview for 2014 to 2019.

Colorado Rolls Out Guidelines and Checklist for Discovery of ESI: eDiscovery Trends

By: Doug Austin

From time to time, we’ve covered not only Federal eDiscovery rules, but also eDiscovery rules within the states as well. One of the states that has been slow to undertake any eDiscovery rulemaking activity is Colorado. However, on June 4, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado did publish new Guidelines Addressing the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information as well as a Checklist for Rule 26(f) Meet-and-Confer Regarding Electronically Stored Information (ESI).

New York Supreme Court Sanctions Two Attorney Defendants for “Egregious Misconduct” in Spoliation of Data: eDiscovery Case Law

By: Doug Austin

In HMS Holdings Corp. v. Arendt, et al., the New York Supreme Court in Albany County ordered a mandatory adverse inference instruction so that the trier of fact could “draw the strongest possible adverse inference from defendants' bad faith and intentional destruction, deletion and failure to produce relevant evidence”. The court also awarded attorney fees, and forwarded a copy of the order regarding Defendant Lange to the New York State Committee on Professional Standards for attorneys.



Browse eDiscovery Daily Blog

About the Bloggers

Brad Jenkins

Brad Jenkins, President and CEO of CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years of experience leading customer focused companies in the litigation support arena. Brad has authored many articles on litigation support issues, and has spoken before national audiences on document management practices and solutions.

Doug Austin

Doug Austin, Professional Services Manager for CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years experience providing legal technology consulting and technical project management services to numerous commercial and government clients. Doug has also authored several articles on eDiscovery best practices.

Jane Gennarelli

Jane Gennarelli is a principal of Magellan’s Law Corporation and has been assisting litigators in effectively handling discovery materials for over 30 years. She authored the company’s Best Practices in a Box™ content product and assists firms in applying technology to document handling tasks. She is a known expert and often does webinars and presentations for litigation support professionals around the country. Jane can be reached by email at