This article appeared in Cybersecurity Law & Strategy, an ALM publication for privacy and security professionals, Chief Information Security Officers, Chief Information Officers, Chief Technology Officers, Corporate Counsel, Internet and Tech Practitioners, In-House Counsel. Visit the website to learn more.

New Rule 37(e) and Inherent Authority: More Ambiguous than Before

Case #1: Hsueh v. New York State Department of Financial Services, 2017 WL 1194706 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2017)

Why this Case is Important: Rule 37(e) does not apply when intentional spoliation occurs, empowering the court to use inherent authority to issue sanctions.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Go To Lexis →

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Go To Bloomberg Law →

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

NOT FOR REPRINT

You Might Like