Citing William A. Gross Construction Associates, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co., 256 F.R.D. 134, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22903 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2009), the magistrate judge was critical of counsel’s unilateral decision on search terms for electronically stored information:
“MP3tunes’ unilateral decision regarding its search reflected a failure to heed Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck’s recent ‘wake-up call’ regarding the need for cooperation concerning e-discovery”.
The judge directed counsel to confer further in an attempt to agree on search terms:
“After conferring, the parties were able to agree on nine search terms, but an additional thirty terms remained in dispute”.
The Court ordered – in the spirit of compromise – which searches could be conducted and which e-mails had to be produced by each party. Concluding specifically on the relevant issue that:
“Each of the thirty disputed terms is relevant to one or more of these additional claims.”
and that the defendant shall therefore:
“conduct the thirty additional searches requested by the Plaintiffs”.
Related Documents:
- The Sedona Conference® Cooperation Proclamation
- William A. Gross Construction Associates, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co., 256 F.R.D. 134, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22903 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2009)
The full text is available at https://thesedonaconference.org…