By Doug Austin
\r\n
In Wilson v. Conair Corp., 1:14-cv-00894-WBS-SAB (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2015), California Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone denied the plaintiff’s motion for the Court to establish dates by which the defendant must produce ESI and ordered the parties to meet and confer (again), warning that if the parties could not reach a resolution, all counsel would be required to personally appear before the court and be prepared to engage in an extended, court-supervised meet and confer session that…
Related Stories
- Defendant Gets Summary Judgment, Not Dismissal, Due to Plaintiff’s Wiping of Hard Drive: eDiscovery Case Law
- Court Acknowledges Lack of Expertise to Recommend Search Methodology, Orders Parties to Confer: eDiscovery Case Law
- Court Orders Plaintiff to Re-Review 95% of its Production Classified as “Highly Confidential”: eDiscovery Case Law
