Case Law
← Back to Blog
Search
Authors
EEOC v. Mia Aesthetics Clinic ATL, LLC – Round III
In EEOC v. Mia Aesthetics Clinic ATL, LLC – Round III, the court rejected reliance on routine document destruction policies as a shield against spoliation sanctions and held that deposition testimony is not an adequate...
EEOC’s Tenacious Pursuit of Discovery Bore Fruit
In EEOC v. GEM Management, LLC, the EEOC’s persistent pursuit of discovery led to a substantially granted motion to compel. The court criticized GEM’s ESI search methodology, custodial self-collection, form of production, Bates numbering, and...
Request for Expedited Discovery Granted; Motion to Stay Discovery Denied
A federal court in Ohio granted a plaintiff’s request for expedited discovery tied to a preliminary injunction motion while denying the defendants’ attempt to stay discovery pending resolution of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
Request for Preservation Order Denied Under the “Cry Wolf” Doctrine
Courts do not lightly issue preservation orders. A request for a preservation order was denied in In Re Zeta Global Data Privacy Litigation, 2026 WL 1283618 (S.D.N.Y. May 11, 2026).
District of Nevada’s Opportunity for Junior Lawyers to Argue Motions
Like most, if not all, federal courts, the District of Nevada has a local rule that permits it to consider motions with or without a hearing. However, there is a novel twist in one Judge’s...
Motion for Reconsideration—It Does Not Exist—But It Is Routinely Entertained—On Limited Grounds
A Colorado federal court denied reconsideration in Stanisaveljevic v. The Standard Fire Ins. Co., finding that evidence already in a party’s possession but left unreviewed is not newly discovered. The opinion reinforces that discovery choices...
What is a “Shotgun” Pleading?
In Kelly v. City of Cochran, GA, the court applied established Eleventh Circuit precedent to explain the four defining characteristics of an impermissible “shotgun” pleading under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Supervisory Duties vis-à-vis “Hallucinated” Citations
A California federal court sanctioned a supervising partner for AI-hallucinated citations his associate filed, holding that a firm’s silence on citation-checking policy implicates the whole institution.
Motion to Compel Forensic Image of Cell Phone: Granted in Part; Denied in Part
Michael Berman analyzes Madrigal v. Live Nation, where a court granted in part Ticketmaster’s motion to compel a forensic image of the class representative’s cell phone. The decision offers practitioners a clear roadmap on Rule...
Court Refuses to Enter Fed.R.Evid. 502(d) & “Clawback” Order Without Agreement; Also Refuses to Order Production of Responsive Documents That Do Not “Hit” on Search Terms
In Medal v. Amazon, a federal court refused to enter a Rule 502(d) clawback order without party agreement and declined to require production of responsive documents not captured by search terms. Michael Berman respectfully disagrees...
Incomplete ESI Protocol Negotiations Do Not Justify Delay in Production
In a recent case, the defendants opposed certain discovery. The court wrote: “Defendants also note that ‘the parties are still negotiating their joint agreement for ESI protocols’ and assert that he parties should not simultaneously be in...
Cite Checking to Find Hallucinated Cases Deemed Insufficient
Recent decisions highlight that relying on cite-checking alone cannot cure hallucinated cases in AI-generated briefs, reinforcing lawyers’ duty of competence and verification.