From E-Discovery Bytes:
Federal district court judge Shira Scheindlin — who penned five seminal opinions in the case of Zubulake v. UBS Warburg — has weighed in again on a litigant’s duty to preserve electronically stored information (“ESI”) relevant to pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation. She even titled her opinion, “Zubulake Revisited: Six Years Later.”
In Pension Committee of University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of American Securities, LLC 05-CIV-9016, 2010 WL 184312 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2010), Judge Scheindlin sanctioned thirteen plaintiff investors for their failure to preserve ESI. Along the way, she sketched a general framework for determining how much to blame a litigant for its failure to preserve ESI and what sanctions to impose when a litigant’s conduct is blameworthy.
But the opinion will be more than just a warning. If Zubulake‘s reception is any guide, the analytical framework laid out in Pension Committee will greatly influence judicial thinking about the discovery of ESI. Practitioners would be wise to be familiar with its contents.
