By Doug Austin
See what I did there?… :o)
\r\n
In Rodman v. Safeway, No. 11-cv-03003-JST (N.D. Cal., Oct. 6, 2016), California District Judge Jon S. Tigar ordered the defendant to pay plaintiff’s Class Counsel $688,646 as a discovery sanction under Rule 26(g), ruling that “failure to search within the contents of the legacy drive constituted an unreasonable inquiry”, but denied without prejudice the plaintiff’s request for a negative jury instruction.
\r\n
Case Background
\r\n
In this certified class…
Related Stories
- Defendant Not Required to Produce All Documents Responsive to Search Terms: eDiscovery Case Law
- Court Denies Defendant’s Motion for Production of Documents for In Camera Review: eDiscovery Case Law
- If Plaintiff Wants Discovery on Defendant’s Backup Tapes, Court Rules He Must Pay for Them: eDiscovery Case Law
