This update addresses the following recent developments and court decisions involving e-discovery issues:
- A Third Circuit ruling reversing a district court decision allowing electronic discovery expenses as taxable costs and severely limiting the scope of such costs that can be recovered by a prevailing party;
- A New York state appellate decision adopting the rule in Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, LLC, that the producing party initially should bear the costs of document production;
- A Kansas federal court ruling finding a law firm had to fulfill its discovery obligations and ordering the firm to issue a litigation hold to preserve its documents and to allow a third party forensic examiner to review the law firm’s computer systems to identify responsive documents; and
- A decision by Magistrate Judge Facciola of the District of Columbia federal district court denying as premature a defendant’s sanctions claim that it was prejudiced in filing a motion for summary judgment by a codefendant’s production of significant ESI after the discovery cutoff and defendant’s summary judgment filing.