Ever since the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, litigants and courts have been struggling to draw the boundaries of appropriate discovery.
That’s why we’ve compiled these recent cases on proportionality and scope in one convenient ediscovery case law summary volume.
We’ve gathered together a range of cases from the last year, encompassing plaintiffs who would rather not produce the evidence they need for their claims and those who would rather engage in endless discovery instead of ever going to trial. We’ve even got a case where the court commended the litigants for cooperating to narrow the issues in dispute! Forensic examinations also came up several times, with courts ruling both for and against them, depending on the circumstances.
This volume includes 17 cases specifically concerning the scope of discovery and proportionality under the amended Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They are:
- Rembrandt Diagnostics, LP v. Innovacon, Inc.
- Campbell v. Chadbourne & Parke LLP
- Winfield v. City of New York
- Hurd v. City of Lincoln
- Firefighters’ Ret. Sys. v. Citco Grp. Ltd.
- In re Simply Orange Orange Juice Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig.
- Shenwick v. Twitter, Inc.
- Nece v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
- The Physicians Alliance Corp. v. WellCare Health Ins. of Ariz., Inc.
- U.S. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc.
- Ramos v. Hopele of Fort Lauderdale, LLC
- Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.
- N. Shore-Long Island Jewish Health Sys., Inc. v. MultiPlan, Inc.
- TMJ Grp., LLC v. IMCMV Holdings
- Motorola Sols., Inc v. Hytera Comms. Corp.
- Finkelstein v. San Mateo Cnty. Dist. Attorney’s Office
- Ortiz v. Amazon.com LLC
- Satmodo, LLC v. Whenever Commc’ns, LLC
- Tanner v. BD LaPlace, LLC
Don’t miss out on this topical volume.
We’re here to help.
If you need a hand or have questions, please contact us.