Affidavits Discovery Litigation 
E-Discovery LLC
JUNE 6, 2025
EAG did not respond, and Mr. Riffle was granted leave to conduct discovery in support of a planned motion for default judgment. The court wrote: Riffle … argued the lack of an affidavit from EAG stating EAG wishes to assert the privilege dooms the motion because EAG, not the firm, “is the holder of the attorney-client privilege.”
E-Discovery LLC
DECEMBER 16, 2024
26, 2024)(unreported), dismissals for discovery violations were affirmed. Nguh, one owner, propounded discovery on Mr. Etame, the opposing owner. The Appellate Court wrote: Mr. Etame failed to respond to discovery, and on March 3, 2022, Ms. Nguh’s discovery requests, including requests for his address and phone number.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
E-Discovery LLC
MARCH 3, 2025
At its most general level, the holding was that a litigant may not invoke the courts to assert their legal rights, then engage in extralegal conduct. In the Courts words, the sanction alleviated prejudice to the employer and signals to Campbell and other litigants that one must deal honestly before the courts. 25, 2025)(Bredar, J.),
E-Discovery LLC
APRIL 5, 2025
In previous blogs, I addressed decisions holding that Where Requests for Discovery were Overly Broad, No Privilege Log was Required (Oct. 12, 2024); No Privilege Log Is Needed While Scope of Discovery Objections Are Pending (Aug. Baltimore Police Dept., 2025 WL 509130 (D. 24, 2024). See generally Fed. 25, 2021).
E-Discovery LLC
APRIL 17, 2025
Plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery responses. At the outset, the Court wrote that it is given great flexibility to order only that discovery that is reasonable for a case, and to adjust the timing of discovery and apportion costs and burdens in a way that is fair and reasonable. Emphasis added].
E-Discovery LLC
JANUARY 28, 2025
24, 2025), the court imposed sanctions on a pro se litigant who, in the courts words, has engaged in unseemly behavior towards counsel as well as improper discovery litigation. He alleged discrepancies in the timestamps of some of the emails produced by Costco as part of the discovery. In Rivera v.
E-Discovery LLC
APRIL 1, 2025
28, 2025), the court entered an order denying plaintiffs motion to compel supplemental document discovery and closing discovery. The court recited the discovery history and added: Despite the relative simplicity of this action, discovery has been anything but simple. Leadenhall Capital Partners LLP , 2025 WL 942414 (S.D.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
130 
Let's personalize your content