Margaret Dale Covers a Case of Deceptive Discovery

This case serves as both a sword and a shield: it protects litigants who pursue corrective discovery efforts to remedy an opponent’s willful mishandling of discoverable information, and it punishes litigants who flout their duties to maintain and disclose relevant information.

Editor’s Note: A Partner in the Litigation Department at Proskauer, resident in the New York office, Margaret Dale shares her observations on an eDiscovery case where both the sword and shield wielded in the ruling.

Extract from article by Margaret Dale from The National Law Review

Late last month, in Klipsch Grp., Inc. v. ePRO E-Commerce Ltd., the Second Circuit affirmed a $2.7 million sanctions award against defendant ePRO after repeated instances of discovery misconduct. Finding that the district court’s award properly reflected the additional costs plaintiff Klipsch Group Inc. was forced to bear due to ePRO’s actions, the Second Circuit disagreed with ePRO that the sanctions were impermissibly punitive and disproportionate. In an era of increasingly complex digital discovery, this case serves as both a sword and a shield: it protects litigants who pursue corrective discovery efforts to remedy an opponent’s willful mishandling of discoverable information, and it punishes litigants who flout their duties to maintain and disclose relevant information.

Additional Reading:

WP-Backgrounds Lite by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann 1010 Wien
Read previous post:
Ralph Losey Highlights a Timely Lesson in Legal Search Stupidity

An interesting, albeit dumb, case out of California provides some good cautionary instruction for anybody doing discovery. Youngevity Int’l Corp. v....

Close