Digging Beneath Nontraditional E-Discovery
According to one survey, more than 99 percent of the world's information is now generated electronically. However, what most lawyers fail to recognize is that not all of that information is necessarily in the form of emails and computer files.
December 21, 2015 at 09:31 AM
5 minute read
According to one survey, more than 99 percent of the world's information is now generated electronically. However, what most lawyers fail to recognize is that not all of that information is necessarily in the form of emails and computer files. Indeed, as society continues to abandon the quaintness of traditional paper records and becomes ever more reliant on digital technology, it is imperative that in-house counsel recognize the implications of looking for electronically stored information in places other than just email. More particularly, giving consideration to the many places in which metadata can hide in the modern world can greatly enhance your company's chances of success in litigation, while at the same time helping to minimize the growing costs of e-discovery.
As the two examples we included below demonstrate, the discovery paradigm is no longer limited to the traditional approach of spending exorbitant amounts of time and money requesting and reviewing thousands of useless emails in search of the one smoking gun. Rather, the search for valuable metadata, and the ability to use it effectively in practice, require imagination, experience and skill well-beyond the typical “data dump” of searching through emails.
Let's start with a hypothetical. Imagine you are in-house counsel for a trucking company that is a defendant in a wrongful death action because one of its trucks was involved in a catastrophic accident with another driver, and there is no question that your driver was negligent. Typically, the corporation would be vicariously liable for any torts that were committed by the employee truck driver under the doctrine of respondeat superior, so long as the accident occurred within the scope of the driver's employment. Your company is now facing a multimillion-dollar lawsuit and your company's only defense is to try to prove that your driver was acting outside the scope of his employment when the accident occurred.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRepublican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
4 minute readSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute readHow Qualcomm’s General Counsel Is Championing Diversity in Innovation
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Kirkland Hires Real Estate Finance Partners in New York
- 2Delaware Governor Names Magistrate Judge as Next Vice Chancellor
- 3Hagens Berman Accused of Withholding Share of $13M Award in Pharmaceutical Settlement
- 4What to Know About Naming a Law Firm
- 5Texas Shows the Way Forward in Resolving Mass Tort Gridlock
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250