Kmart Corp. shouldn’t be penalized for cleaning up its digital-document drawers, according to a recent case summary from K&L Gates. The Superior Court of the Virgin Islands had ordered the company to produce 21 categories of documents for a suit in which it was a nonparty, and some of the documents dated back to 1991.
The company produced some documentation, but not enough to satisfy the plaintiff. “Kmart explained, for example, that it did not maintain records pertaining to merchandise sales by year prior to 2000,” note the lawyers from K&L Gates. The plaintiff then tried to get the company declared in contempt of court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
