In Edelen v. Campbell Soup Co. et. al., 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 114893 (N.D. GA Dec. 8, 2009), Senior District Court Judge J. Owen Forrester overruled plaintiff's objections to the magistrate judge's order directing plaintiff's counsel to pay defendants' attorney's fees related to narrowing the scope of plaintiff's electronic discovery requests. 

In Amobi, et. al. v. District of Columbia Dep't of Corrections, et. al., 2009 U.S. Dist. Lexis 114270 (D.D.C. December 8, 2009), Magistrate Judge John Facciola, citing Federal Rule of Evidence 502, ruled that defendants waived the work-product protection in a memorandum prepared by counsel due to their inability to sufficiently articulate any reasonable steps they took to prevent the disclosure of the documents.

In Rhoades v. YWCA of Greater Pittsburgh, 2009 WL 3319820 (W.D. Pa. Oct. 14, 2009), District Court Judge Donetta Ambrose ruled that under Federal Rule of Evidence 502 defendant was entitled to the return of an inadvertently produced document attached as an exhibit to plaintiff's amended complaint.

Cenveo Corp. v. Southern Graphic Systems et. al., 2009 WL 4042898 (D.Minn. Nov. 18, 2009), U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan granted defendants' motion to compel documents in their native format holding plaintiff failed to produce the documents as requested by defendants and further failed to timely object to a native production.

On January 21, 2010, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear public comment on the proposed state e-discovery rulemaking.  For a copy of the hearing notice, click here.

In SEC v. Strauss, 2009 WL 3459204 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2009), U.S. Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman denied the defendant's application to compel the SEC to grant him remote access to Deloitte and Touche's electronic database.

In In re eBay Seller Antitrust Litigation, 2009 WL 3613511 (Oct. 28, 2009), District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel issued an order overruling eBay's objections to the magistrate judge's prior order requiring eBay to produce certain electronic data.

In Mirbeau of Geneva Lake LLC v. City of Lake Geneva, et. al., 2009 WL 3347101 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 15, 2009), U.S. District Court Judge J.P. Stadtmueller denied plaintiff's request to compel defendants to produce their computers and other electronic storage devices for forensic examination and further denied plaintiff's motion to sequester the defendant city's electronic storage systems.

In Dawe v. Corrections USA, 2009 WL 3233883 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2009), U.S. Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan granted defendants' motion to compel inspection of a third-party plaintiff's laptop computer.  While inspection is the exception rather than the rule, the court was persuaded by the "level of contention and distrust that permeate[d] this litigation" and plaintiff's steadfast refusal to permit even a limited inspection.

In Palm Bay Int'l, Inc. v. Marchesi di Barola S.P.A., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104020 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 9, 2009), U.S. Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson granted, in part, defendant's motions to compel production of documents, including electronically stored information and, while acknowledging the lawyers desire to be "zealous advocates", cautioned both parties of the need to meaningfully meat and confer.