3 Responses to The Top Twenty-Two Most Interesting e-Discovery Opinions of 2016

  1. Doug Austin says:

    Great list, Ralph! Though I’m a bit surprised that Nuvasive v. Madsen Med didn’t make the list as it was a case where the plaintiff was originally sanctioned in 2015 for deletion of text messages and then, after the 2015 Fed rules — including Rule 37(e) — were adopted, the plaintiff filed a motion to vacate the order. The court granted the motion, due to the fact that the court did not rule that the deletion of text messages was intentional. Interesting case to look at how spoliation was addressed before and after the new Rule 37(e). Here’s a link to our coverage of it: http://www.ediscovery.co/ediscoverydaily/case-law/changes-in-federal-rules-result-in-reversal-of-adverse-inference-sanction-ediscovery-case-law/

    For what it’s worth, of course! 🙂

    • Ralph Losey says:

      I missed that case. Thanks for bringing to my attention. Mighta made the list had I known, not sure. Never heard of a reversal like that. Very odd.

  2. […] As I sit contemplating collecting together the 2016 eDisclosure-related judgments from England and Wales, I have to admire Ralph Losey who kicked off the year with a 30,000+ word essay on the Top 22 most interesting US eDiscovery cases of 2016. […]

Leave a Reply