We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Philip N. Yannella Ballard Spahr LLP

Results 1 to 5 of 11



California Federal Court awards millions for predictive coding costs in document review *

USA - March 15 2013
A federal court in California recently awarded defendants in a patent infringement case more than $2.8 million in attorneys' fees relating to the use…

Co-authors: Christopher Corsi.


Failure to issue litigation hold is not necessarily gross negligence, Second Circuit holds *

USA - July 24 2012
In a decision that will surprise some, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held in Chin v. Port Authority that the failure to issue a litigation hold is not gross negligence per se.

Co-authors: Christopher Corsi.


Pennsylvania adopts limited set of eDiscovery rules *

USA - June 12 2012
In a move likely to be greeted as much with criticism as relief, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently adopted a very limited set of amendments to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure that are expressly designed to make the eDiscovery process less complicated than in the federal system.

Co-authors: Maura E. McKenna.


Third Circuit limits taxation of electronic discovery costs *

USA - March 20 2012
In a ruling likely to disappoint corporate defendants, the Third Circuit recently reversed a lower court’s taxation of more than $365,000 in eDiscovery costs, finding that the district court’s reading of the underlying taxation statute was “untethered” from the statutory language.


N.J. Supreme Court clarifies impact of FDA approval on discovery rule *

USA - March 1 2012
Adopting a middle-of-the-road approach that may raise more questions than it answers, the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled that FDA approval of drug and medical device warnings creates a presumption against application of the discovery rule to a defendant’s otherwise-valid statute of limitations defense.

Co-authors: Michael R. Carroll.


Next »