A recent employment discrimination lawsuit underscores the importance employers must place on preserving and producing electronic evidence. As explained below, the employer lost an opportunity to avoid significant costs associated with searching and recovering emails.
Specifically, in Wagoner v. Lewis Gale Med. (7/13/16), the plaintiff sued his former employer Lewis Gale Medical Center LLC
Divorce can be a horrendous process for those directly involved. But it can also be challenging for employers who are inadvertently dragged into divorce proceedings. This is because a company’s interests are increasingly put at risks as digital evidence in the form of text messaging or emails becomes “Exhibit A” in divorce trials.
In this
Craig Ball, a top-shelf e-discovery thought leader, recently wrote a blog post asking “Should a Legal Hold ‘Waiver’ Be Secured from Departing Employees?” As explained below, the answer is no.
But first for background purposes, a party – an individual or business entity – has an obligation to preserve information, in any
Ken Kesey, an American author best known for his novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1962), once exclaimed “To hell with facts! We need stories!”
Mr. Kesey’s exclamation often becomes the storyline when a party to litigation mismanages their e-discovery preservation obligations and is then forced to respond to sanctions and spoliation
Growing up, my dad was a huge country music fan. I refused to appreciate this style of music for no other reason than it was what my parents liked. But one song I vividly remember was the Gambler by Kenny Rogers.
The refrain from that song always plays in my mind when it it comes
A recent employment discrimination claim highlights that employers and their lawyers still struggle with e-discovery preservation obligations.
In Haraburda v. Arcelor Mittal USA, Inc.(N.D. Ind. 6/28/2011) (PDF) the defendant former employer was ordered by the Court to implement a broad litigation hold to preserve information that may be discoverable (i.e., information that relates or may
A recent employment termination turned litigation offers important lessons for employers and employees when it comes to preserving computer information maintained on company issued laptops and related equipment.
In Larkin v. Trinity Lighting, Inc. (PDF) (S.D. Miss. Apr. 20, 2011), Larkin was employed by Trinity as a salesperson and provided a company laptop, desktop computer
On May 31, 2011, Crain’s Detroit Business (by Chad Halcom) reported that a prominent Detroit law firm and its Vice-Chairman had settled litigation involving various employment law claims filed by a former executive assistant.
I previously reported on this employment discrimination litigation and also discussed the lessons to be learned from the law firm’s alleged
Part I of this post discussed the background of a party’s obligation to preserve email information in response to an employment litigation claim and when that obligation may arise. As explained in Part I, this discussion took place in the context of an employment discrimination claim against a prominent Detroit law firm Honigman Miller Schwartz
A prominent Detroit law firm, Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn, was recently sued by a former executive assistant after she was discharged following an on-the-job injury and related employment discrimination claims.
For any employer, dealing with such a garden variety employment discrimination claim has risks and costs. But the suit against Honigman also provides