ARTICLE
3 February 2016

Rule 37(E) And Spoliation Sanctions Under The Amended Rules

KL
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

Contributor

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer is a world-leading global law firm, where our ambition is to help you achieve your goals. Exceptional client service and the pursuit of excellence are at our core. We invest in and care about our client relationships, which is why so many are longstanding. We enjoy breaking new ground, as we have for over 170 years. As a fully integrated transatlantic and transpacific firm, we are where you need us to be. Our footprint is extensive and committed across the world’s largest markets, key financial centres and major growth hubs. At our best tackling complexity and navigating change, we work alongside you on demanding litigation, exacting regulatory work and complex public and private market transactions. We are recognised as leading in these areas. We are immersed in the sectors and challenges that impact you. We are recognised as standing apart in energy, infrastructure and resources. And we’re focused on areas of growth that affect every business across the world.
E-Discovery counsel Samantha V. Ettari's article "Rule 37(e) and Spoliation Sanctions Under the Amended Rules," appeared in the February 1, 2016, issue of the New York Law Journal.
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

E-Discovery counsel Samantha V. Ettari's article "Rule 37(e) and Spoliation Sanctions Under the Amended Rules," appeared in the February 1, 2016, issue of the New York Law Journal. In December 2015, an expanded Rule 37(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect, which instructs on remedies and sanctions available for spoliation of electronically stored information (ESI). The remedies and sanctions potentially available for negligent and intentional spoliation are clearer, and intended to result in more uniform application. In this article, Ms. Ettari examines the first ruling issued under revised Rule 37(e) - the Jan. 12, 2016, decision issued in the Southern District of New York in CAT3 v. Black Lineage, which analyzed the appropriate remedies available under the revised rule for the intentional spoliation of email content, and awarded sanctions.

Rule 37(e) and Spoliation Sanctions Under the Amended Rules

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More