E-Discovery LLC

JULY 3, 2025

Roberts had termination authority over her “and exerted his influence over the decision to terminate Plaintiff Cooper based on the pretext of a ‘failed drug test’ despite Mr. Roberts’ own admission to the Plaintiff of the contrary results of the test.” Efforts to subpoena or depose Mr. Roberts were “thwarted to date by his evasiveness.”

Evidence

E-Discovery LLC

AUGUST 6, 2025

Game ending sanctions are available under Rule 37(e)(2) if the same predicate is met, but “only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation….” Under 28 U.S.C. Specifically, the defendants spent $75,175.42 ($71,458.78 in attorney’s fees and $3,716.64

Affidavits

E-Discovery LLC

OCTOBER 15, 2024

July 22, 2024), the Court addressed the type of objections that a subpoenaed non-party may make. That was a novel issue in Maryland. The Court held “that [nonparty] TST had standing to challenge the subpoena on grounds that some of the requests were overbroad and not relevant to the subject matter involved in the divorce action.”

Subpoenas

E-Discovery LLC

NOVEMBER 11, 2024

non-party TEDCO’s blanket privilege and work product objections to a subpoena were denied; however, it lived to fight another day because the denial was without prejudice to file supported objections after a “meet and confer.” Singleton, issued several non-party subpoenas, including one to ImpactHR. In Singleton v. The plaintiff, Ms.

Objections

E-Discovery LLC

APRIL 8, 2025

28, 2025), the court granted in part and denied in part a motion to quash subpoenas issued to AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile (the Wayfarer Parties) by Ms. Contextually, the litigation has been described in popular media. Lang, Ruling in Blake Lively’s Subpoena for Justin Baldoni Phone Records (Feb. Blake Lively.

Subpoenas