Related By Tag: litigation hold

Loest & McNamme v. Camera / Broadbent Selections

Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Motion for Sanctions against Defendants Katherine Camera, an individual, and Broadbent Selections, Inc. Defendants’ Counsel Mr. Joseph Marconi and Mr. Victor J. Pioli of Johnson & Bell LTD. successfully defeated those allegations using analysis of Forensicon’s Senior Examiner, Yaniv Schiff.

Merck Eprova AG v. Gnosis SPA

Court Grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions Due to Discovery Deficiencies 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38867 (S.D.N.Y. April 20, 2010) On plaintiff’s motion for sanctions due to discovery deficiencies, the Southern District of New York imposed a $25,000 fine on a litigant whose failure to properly install a litigation hold and conduct appropriate searches for relevant[…Read More]

Jones v. Bremen High School District 228

Defendant Sanctioned for Failure to Issue Litigation Hold 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51312 (N.D. Ill. 2010) In a race discrimination case, the defendant high school was sanctioned for its failure to issue a litigation hold. After receiving notice of the plaintiff’s filing with the EEOC, the defendant did not install a litigation hold but rather[…Read More]

Pinstripe, Inc. v. Manpower, Inc.

On Oct. 25th, 2007, Pinstripe filed suit against Manpower, Inc. and IBM for breach of contract. Attorneys for Manpower immediately drafted a litigation hold, but in January 2009, in-house counsel the company had failed to issue the hold. Further investigation revealed that two employees may have deleted pertinent email data. Forensicon was hired to conduct[…Read More]

Data Security – What To Do When An Employee Leaves

Unfortunately for employers, unconditional trust in an employee’s honesty is not a luxury any employer can afford. The Computer Security Institute’s “2003 Computer Crime and Security Survey” indicates that “theft of proprietary information caused the greatest financial loss” and, additionally, 62 percent of those who responded to the survey reported that an insider was involved[…Read More]

Bryant, et al v. Chicago Public Schools, et al.

Forensicon was jointly retained by Plaintiff and Defendants. Defendant Gardner submitted a printed copy of a letter dated September 28, 2007 purportedly containing information in opposition to one or more of Plaintiff’s. Defendant Gardner also submitted a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury. Forensicon created and analyzed a forensic image of Gardner’s laptop computer and[…Read More]