The recent case of Einstein v. 357 LLC[FOOTNOTE 1] discloses the need for the New York Legislature to amend Article 31 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to relieve stress on the courts with respect to the discovery of electronically stored information. Judges are struggling to apply antiquated rules forged long ago in a document-only world to ESI-disclosure disputes that drafters of the CPLR never envisioned. Parties are bedeviled with escalating costs caused, at least in part, by the lack of clear rules. These stresses frustrate the dispute resolution process because they tend to tie up resources and delay justice.
ESI frustrations were recently on display in Einstein, where Justice Charles E. Ramos sanctioned a defendant for failing to adopt and enforce a “litigation hold” to prevent the ongoing destruction of e-mails requested by the plaintiffs. The court’s opinion reveals that: (a) plaintiffs were frustrated by the need to bring several motions and hire an ESI vendor just to get access to a limited number of missing e-mails; (b) the court had to expend significant judicial resources to get to the bottom of the story of the missing e-mails; and (c) the defendant appeared to be confused as to the nature and extent of its discovery obligations as to ESI.
This content has been archived.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]
