District of MD

United States District Court for the District of Maryland

May 23, 2023

Fowler Cell Phone Decision Affirmed

In Fowler v. Tenth Planet, Inc., 2023 WL 2691576 (D. Md. Mar. 29, 2023)(Coulson, J.)(“Fowler I”), the Magistrate Judge wrote that preservation of a cell phone “in place” may be acceptable in some instances, but made clear that it is risky.  Plaintiff had not backed up his cell phone.  He left it […]
April 26, 2023

Court Holds That Federal Spoliation Rules Are Both Independent and Interrelated in Cell Phone Sanctions Case

In Doe v. Willis, 2023 WL 2918507 (M.D. Fl. Apr. 12, 2023), the plaintiff’s lawyer imposed an oral legal hold, telling her that she should not delete texts, throw away evidence, or post anything on Facebook, and: “That’s about it.”  The instructions were not memorialized in a writing.  Subsequently, the plaintiff dropped […]
April 26, 2023

Authentication of ESI on Motion Compelling Arbitration Despite Factual Dispute

Authentication is a central issue when it comes to use of ESI in motions or at trial.[1] In Mason v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC, 2021 WL 4820520, at *5 (D. Md. Oct. 15, 2021)(Boardman, J.), the Court addressed authentication of ESI on a summary judgment motion.  Here, defense counsel dotted all of the […]
April 23, 2023

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing:  Litigant Can’t Convert a Discovery Dispute Into a Sanctions Motion

Litigants cannot use a spoliation motion to bring an untimely discovery dispute to the court.  Rains v. Westminster College, 2023 WL 2894506, at *4 n. 44, passim (D. Ut. Apr. 11, 2023). While Rains presented several examples of disguising an untimely motion to compel as a sanctions motion, the “background check” dispute […]
April 20, 2023

Authentication of a Disputed Email and Attachment

Boshea v. Compass Marketing, Inc., 2023 WL 2743333 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2023)(Hollander, J.), involved authentication of disputed electronically stored information. “Authentication” is a necessary predicate to all uses of ESI: “[C]onsidering the significant costs associated with discovery of ESI, it makes little sense to go to all the bother and expense […]
April 17, 2023

Recent “Textbook” Analysis of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(e)

Government Employees Health Assoc. v. Actelion Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., __ F.R.D. ___, 2023 WL 316578 (D. Md. Jan. 19, 2023)(Coulson, J.), provides a textbook application of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(e) in an antitrust lawsuit with a complex fact pattern. The Court rejected Rule 37(e)(2) sanctions and engaged in a sophisticated analysis to fashion Rule 37(e)(1) […]
April 12, 2023

“Juror’s Cellphone Not Subject to Search”

Cell phones have led to thorny legal issues.  For example, in Juror’s Cellphone Not Subject to Search (americanbar.org)(Feb. 21, 2023), Steven B. Chaneles, wrote that, in response to a post-verdict challenge:  “A federal appeals court ruled that a trial judge has no authority to order a search of a juror’s cellphone….” The […]
April 10, 2023

District of Maryland Sets Guidelines for Cell Phone Preservation in Place

Fowler v. Tenth Planet, Inc., 2023 WL 2691576 (D. Md. Mar. 29, 2023)(Coulson, J.), is an important and thoughtful decision demonstrating the peril of preservation in place. In Fowler, the plaintiff left his cell phone in an unlocked car.  It was stolen after the duty to preserve had been triggered.  It contained […]
April 8, 2023

Spoliation Motion Mooted

In CSAA Affinity Insurance Company v. The Scott Fetzer Company, 2023 WL 2714026 (D. Md. Mar. 30, 2023), a subrogated insurer sued the manufacturer of a sump pump, alleging that the pump was defective and started a house fire.  The defendant-manufacturer asserted spoliation, and it moved for sanctions. However, defendant’s motion for […]
April 7, 2023

District of MD Standing Order Re: Direct Assignment to USMJ’s

The U.S. District Court for Maryland “has entered Standing Order 2023-01 regarding the pilot project to directly assign certain civil cases to the Magistrate Judges of this Court for all proceedings and the entry of a final judgment, subject to the consent of all parties.” One purpose of the Order is to […]
April 7, 2023

District of Maryland’s Proposed Amendment to “Good Faith” Conference Rule

Like most courts, the District of Maryland requires that attorneys confer regarding a discovery dispute to resolve their differences.  Local Rule 104.7 provides that the Court “will not consider” any discovery motion that does not contain a certificate of compliance. Two amendments have been proposed. First, instead of a requirement that counsel […]
April 6, 2023

District of Maryland’s Proposed Amendment to Discovery Guideline 5

The United States District Court for the District of Maryland has proposed an amendment so that Discovery Guideline 5 will conform to amendments to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6).  I chaired a subcommittee of the Federal Court Bench Bar Committee which submitted a proposed amendment to the Court for its consideration.  Subcommittee members included Phil […]
March 17, 2023

Better Late Than Never? Case Dismissed for Filing 16 Minutes After Midnight

“Like Cinderella, the attorney in this case tripped on the electronic stairs at midnight, but his client lost more than a glass slipper.”  Tom Donlon, Silly Lawyer Tricks XXX (americanbar.org)(Mar. 14, 2023)(emphasis added). In this case, the court’s filing deadline was at midnight on April 22nd.  The attorney logged on to the […]
March 16, 2023

eDiscovery Assistant’s 2022 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review Report

It is well worth downloading eDiscovery Assistant’s excellent 2022 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review | eDiscovery Assistant. The Report provides interesting metrics about eDiscovery, such as the following chart: Id.  The Report states that “failure to produce” was the most litigated issue, followed by proportionality and sanctions.  Interestingly, “failure to preserve” […]
March 15, 2023

Sua Sponte Dismissal Relying in Part on Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b)

In Gunter v. Alutiiq Advanced Security Systems, LLC, 2023 WL 2330707 (D. Md. Mar. 2, 2023)(Rubin, J.), the Court relied in part on Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) to dismiss a litigant’s lawsuit for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  The case involved egregious[1] misconduct that included fraud on the Court, […]
March 13, 2023

Judicial Interpretation of an ESI Protocol

This blog discusses how the Court interpreted the ESI protocol in McCormick & Co., Inc. v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., 2023 WL 2433902 (D. Md. March 9, 2023)(Bredar, J.), McCormick was a consolidated breach of contract action involving multi-million dollar claims. The Court wrote: The ESI Protocol provides, under a subsection titled “No Presumption of […]
March 13, 2023

Should an ESI Protocol Be Incorporated Into a Court Order?

There is a lot of debate over whether an ESI Protocol should be incorporated into a court order; however, the decision may be unimportant as a practical matter. In McCormick & Co., Inc. v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., 2023 WL 2433902 (D. Md. March 9, 2023), the parties did not incorporate their […]
March 9, 2023

“Civil Vigilantism” – Sanctions for Surreptitious “Self-Help” Investigation

Taken together, the following three cases demonstrate that surreptitious “self-help” to obtain evidence from an opponent outside of the discovery process, even if it occurs prior to commencement of an action, is – at a minimum – imprudent. In Cruse, alleged hacking resulted in disqualification of counsel who used the fruits of […]
December 26, 2022

Should Carl Little, Jr., Have Won His Appeal Challenging Denial of a Spoliation Instruction?

In Little v. Pohanka, 2022 WL 17412861 (Appellate Ct. of Md. Dec. 5, 2022), Mr. Little sued Mr. Pohanka for negligent driving.  The jury found that Mr. Pohanka was negligent; however, in Maryland, contributory negligence is a complete defense, and the jury determined that Mr. Little was contributorily negligent.  As a result, […]
December 23, 2022

Does Maryland Have an Analog to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(g)?

Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(g) has been called the “stop and think” rule.  The Rule is “designed to curb discovery abuse” and to “impose an ‘affirmative duty’ on counsel to behave responsibly during discovery….”  The Hon. Paul W. Grimm, et al., “New Paradigm for Discovery Practice: Cooperation” 43 Md. Bar J. 26, 29-30 (Nov./Dec.2010), quoting […]
December 15, 2022

Md. State Bar Association Social Media Program

It was a pleasure to participate yesterday in an MSBA program on “Social Media as Evidence” for the Young Lawyers Section.  After an introduction by T.J. Keilty, I provided an overview of what constitutes social media.  The Hon. J. Mark Coulson discussed discovery issues, including His Honor’s decisions in Allen v. PPE Casino […]
November 19, 2022

Md. State Bar Association Program on Social Media

I will be co-presenting a program for the MSBA Young Lawyers Section, together with the Hon. J. Mark Coulson, Alicia L. Shelton, Esq., Thomas J. Keilty, III, Esq., and Ashley Aranega of X1 Social Discovery.  Please see the flier below:
November 11, 2022

Be Careful What You Agree To, But the Duty to Cooperate May Provide an Escape Hatch (Part II)

In Advanced Magnesium Alloys Corp. v. Dery, 2022 WL 3139391 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 5, 2022), defendant, Alliance, agreed to search 159 terms.  However, when it produced the text messages “hitting” those terms, plaintiff found the texts to be cryptic and asked for more texts to provide context.  Alliance said – in my […]
October 28, 2022

Sanctions Denied, But Be Careful What You Agree To (Part I)

In Canter v. Zeigler, 2022 WL 6754646 (D. Md. Oct. 10, 2022)(Sullivan, J.), a contempt motion was made because the State failed to timely perform its agreement that had been incorporated into a Court order.  The lawsuit was filed by an inmate against prison medical and supervisory staff.  Plaintiff served a subpoena […]
October 11, 2022

Turtle and Tourist Photos Were Insufficient to Authenticate Texts in Criminal Case

The Maryland Daily Record reports that prosecutors have been barred from using texts and other messages sent by defendant’s spouse in a case alleging fraud and embezzlement.  Bryan R. Sears, McGrath fraud case: Prosecutors can’t use alleged vacation texts, judge rules (thedailyrecord.com)(Oct. 11, 2022). The paper reports that the trial judge had […]
September 7, 2022

Isn’t It Time for a Uniform National Standard on “Possession, Custody, or Control”?

In civil discovery, litigants must produce information that is within their “possession, custody, or control,” subject to the applicable scope of discovery.  However, federal courts have markedly differing definitions of “possession, custody, or control.”  A uniform standard would further the goal of the just, speedy, and inexpensive resolution of many lawsuits. Mike […]
August 15, 2022

Is There a Duty to “’Fess Up?”

Several Fourth Circuit, District of Maryland, and Maryland intermediate appellate decisions stand for the proposition that, where a potential litigant is unable to comply with the duty to preserve potentially responsive information, the potential litigant has a duty to notify the anticipated opponent before the information goes missing. For example: I have […]
August 10, 2022

Authentication of Disputed Signature by Description of Information Governance Policy

In Mason v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC,  2021 WL 4820520, at *1 (D. Md. Oct. 15, 2021), the Court held that defendant had properly authenticated a disputed signature on an arbitration agreement.  The signature was authenticated by testimony of a human resources officer as to defendant’s routine business practices. Mr. Mason was employed […]
August 9, 2022

“Navigating Social Media Discovery: Steps Counsel Can Take to Address Mass Deletion of Social Media History”

An interesting post by Phillip Favro, The Hon. Helen Adams, and Leslie Behaunek, Navigating Social Media Discovery: Steps Counsel Can Take to Address Mass Deletion of Social Media History – Innovative Driven (id-edd.com) (June 1, 2022), describes tools provided by Instagram and Facebook that users may employ to delete material posted to […]
August 7, 2022

Court Excused Party From Waiver by Failure to Provide Specific Objections

In Doma Title Ins., Inc. v. Avance Title, LLC, 2022 WL 2668530 (D. Md. Jul. 11, 2022)(Quereshi, J.), the Court addressed a motion to compel discovery in a breach of contract action. The Court held that defendant’s discovery objections were too general; however, on the facts presented, including the manner in which […]
July 16, 2022

Denial of Discovery to Oppose Motion for Summary Judgment

In Markel Ins. Co. v. Sumpter, 2022 WL 2703832 (D. Md. July 11, 2022)(Hazel, J.), the Court denied a request for discovery to oppose a motion for summary judgment. Markel Insurance defended an alleged auto tort under a reservation of rights.  It then filed this action against both drivers for a declaration […]
July 15, 2022

Use of Phased Discovery to Achieve Proportionality

In Guzman v. KP StoneyMill, Inc., 2022 WL 1748308 (D. Md. May 31, 2022)(Quereshi, J.), a single plaintiff sued his employer for alleged FLSA violations.  The Court addressed a number of discovery issues.[1] The case provides a textbook example of the use of phased discovery to achieve proportionality. Plaintiff had worked for the defendants […]
July 14, 2022

Remote Deposition Misconduct – Again – With Novel Cure – Again

“An attorney who quietly provided answers to his client during her remote video deposition violated ethics rules, a court has held.” William H. Newman, Court Sanctions Attorney for Feeding Deponent Answers (americanbar.org) (Apr. 27, 2022).  Counsel was disqualified as a result. Like many depositions during the pandemic, the Barksdale deposition took place remotely over […]
July 13, 2022

Failed Request for a Preservation Order

In Gibson v. Frederick County, MD, 2022 WL 2593710 (D. Md. Jul. 6, 2022), the Court denied a request for a preservation order that was made in the form of a motion for a temporary restraining order.  Plaintiffs sought an order to preserve certain information after expiration of a statutory preservation mandate […]
June 21, 2022

Perils of a Vague Preservation Letter

Nolan v. O.C. Seacrets, Inc., 2021 WL 4806337 (D. Md. Oct. 14, 2021), reemphasizes that a preservation letter needs to be well-drafted and provide details sufficient to put the recipient on notice of the factual nature of the claim.  In Nolan, because plaintiff’s preservation demand was purportedly too vague, it may have […]
June 14, 2022

FLSA Litigant Cannot Refuse to Provide Relevant Discovery Merely Because It May Open the Responding Party Up to Other Liability

In Guzman v. KP StoneyMill, Inc., 2022 WL 1748308 (D. Md. May 31, 2022)(Quereshi, J.), a single plaintiff sued his employer for alleged FLSA violations.  The Court addressed a number of discovery issues.  This blog focuses on one of them – defendants’ assertion that it need not provide discovery because doing so […]
May 31, 2022

Historical ESI Highlights – Part VIII – Cooperation and The Cooperation Proclamation

Like many of its other publications, The Sedona Conference’s “Cooperation Proclamation” was an inflection point. The Cooperation Proclamation was published by The Sedona Conference in 2008.[1] It was followed by a number of publications, endorsed by Mancia v. Mayflower Textile Services. Co., 253 F.R.D. 354 (D. Md. Oct. 15, 2008), and by […]
May 29, 2022

Historical ESI Highlights – Part VI – Victor Stanley and Keyword Searching

The prior blog discussed the historical acceptance of technology assisted review.  However, keyword searching remains an important and useful tool.  Mark Twain wrote: “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated….”  The same may be true of keyword searching. While there are many decisions and articles on keyword searching, one of the […]
May 27, 2022

Historical ESI Highlights – Part IV – Hopson & Fed.R.Evid. 502

Protection of privilege and work product material is costly and complex when it is buried in voluminous ESI. An opinion of the Hon. Paul W. Grimm, Hopson v. Mayor of Baltimore, 232 F.R.D. 228 (D. Md. 2005), prompted Congress to change the law and enact Fed.R.Evid. 502. Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5) created the “clawback” […]
April 29, 2022

Deposition Errata Pages in Maryland

An excellent article by Brian A. Zemel, All Things Errata (americanbar.org)(ABA Apr. 19, 2022), addresses the scope of changes a deponent may make to an errata sheet. He explains: If the deponent’s submission is procedurally valid, counsel should then determine whether the witness’s changes were substantive and whether the jurisdiction permits such changes. […]
April 20, 2022

Sanctions Imposed for Fabricated and Unproduced Text Messages

In Gunter v. Alutiiq Advanced Security Solutions, LLC, 2022 WL 1139875 (D. Md. Apr. 18, 2022), a pro se plaintiff alleged various employment discrimination claims. After defendant provided forensic testimony, the plaintiff was sanctioned under Rule 41(b), Rule 37(e), Rule 26(g), and the Court’s inherent power, for fabricating and failing to produce […]
April 10, 2022

Ethics: More Remote Misconduct

I have written about Misconduct in Remote Trials and Misconduct in Remote Depositions. In the words of Yogi Berra, “it’s deja vue all over again.”  Improper Texting During Remote Testimony Can Result in Significant Consequences to Litigants and Lawyers | Publications | Insights | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. Traci McKee […]
March 24, 2022

Maryland v. Federal Summary Judgment Rule

After the December 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I co-authored two publications noting some of the differences between the new Federal Rules and the Maryland Rules. M. Berman & A. Shelton,  “Commentary: With ESI, difference between federal, state rules,” The Daily Record (June 17, 2016); M. Berman, et al., […]
March 23, 2022

Relevance Redactions Rejected – Rule 26(f) Resolution

This blog focuses on: authorities denying permission to redact irrelevant information from discoverable documents; a minority view to the contrary; and, a proposed solution using a Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) conference of the parties where appropriate.  If a party foresees the need to redact irrelevant or confidential information from an otherwise discoverable document, the […]
March 11, 2022

Secondary Evidence as a “Gap Filler”

In Hale v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 2022 WL 374512 (D. Md. Feb. 8, 2022), the Court applied the secondary evidence rule where text messages had been deleted: As discussed throughout, there is a glaring lack of documentary or testimonial evidence corroborating the existence of the text messages that constitute […]
March 11, 2022

No Sanction Despite Convoluted and Murky Explanation for Missing Texts

In Hale v. Mayor & City Co. of Baltimore City, 2022 WL 374512 (D. Md. Feb. 8, 2022), the Court denied a request for sanctions in the summary judgment context despite a “convoluted and murky” explanation for missing text messages.  The Court described the missing texts as “the primary basis of [plaintiff’s] […]
March 8, 2022

Failure to Cooperate Costs Clients Money

Much has been written about the duty to cooperate.  In 1850, Abraham Lincoln wrote: “Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can…. As a peacemaker, the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good man [or woman].” [1] No attorney wants a judicial opinion stating that they have wasted the client’s […]
March 7, 2022

Requests for a Preservation Order

Preservation orders may be entered by agreement, ex parte, or upon motion after an opportunity for briefing.  Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(3)(B)(iii) and Rule 26(f)(3)(C) authorize preservation orders as part of a discovery plan or scheduling order.  Additionally, “[a] federal court may also issue preservation orders as part of its inherent authority to manage its […]
November 28, 2021

Sanctions for: Failure to Impose a Litigation Hold; and, for Removing Zoo Animals After Notice of Inspection and Without Cooperative Communications

Collins v. Tri-State Zoological Park of Western MD, Inc., 2021 WL 5416533 (D. Md. Nov. 19, 2021), centers on allegations that defendants maintained a public nuisance by the neglect and ongoing mistreatment of animals residing at defendants’ zoo. On the spoliation issue, “Plaintiffs allege … that Defendants not only failed to issue […]
August 27, 2021

Waiver of Work Product Protection in Deposition Preparation Sessions

In Johnson v. Baltimore Police Dept., 2021 WL 1985014 (D. Md. May 18, 2021) (Boardman, J.), the Court addressed waiver of work product protection by showing documents to a third-party witness in deposition preparation. Twice before the deposition, plaintiff’s counsel showed three documents, several photographs, and one audio file to the deponent.  […]
August 18, 2021

Defendant Unsuccessfully Argued that Plaintiff Could Not Show That Data on Cell Phone That Defendant Destroyed Was Relevant

In McCoy v. Transdev Svc., Inc., 2021 WL 1215770 (D. Md. Mar. 31, 2021) (Copperthite, J.), data on Defendant’s former employee’s cell phone was erased after Plaintiffs had sent a preservation letter.[1] Defendant Transdev admitted that it had a duty to preserve the evidence and had control over it when it was […]
August 11, 2021

There Is a Difference Between Relevance for Discovery and Relevance for Spoliation Sanctions

In Snyder v. Moag & Co., LLC, 2021 WL 3190493 (D. Md. Jul. 28, 2021) (Copperthite, J.), the Court wrote that, “the matter is quite simple – has Petitioner met the elements of spoliation.”  The Court answered that in the negative.  In doing so, it differentiated between the loss or destruction of […]
February 7, 2021

When Should a Spoliation Motion Be Filed and Decided? – – An Update

In Membreno v. Atlanta Restaurant Partners, LLC, 2021 WL 351174 (D. Md. Feb. 2, 2021), the Court penalized a litigant for her untimely filing of a spoliation motion, even though the motion had merit.  While the Court granted the request for sanctions, it denied a request for attorneys’ fees due to the […]
December 26, 2020

Discovery of the Identity of a Person Associated With an I.P. Address

UPDATE:  on  August 10, 2021, the Court issued an opinion in Strike3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, 2021 WL 3511124 (D. Md. Aug. 10, 2021). ***** In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, 2020 WL 7640943 (D. Md. Dec. 23, 2020), the Court authorized, but only in a strictly limited way, […]
December 26, 2020

When Should a Spoliation Motion Be Filed and Decided?

Several recent decisions from the District of Maryland address the question of when a spoliation motion should be filed and decided.  Eller v. Prince George’s Co. Public Schools, et al., 2020 WL 7336730 (D. Md. Dec. 14, 2020); Shackelford v. Vivint Solar Developer, LLC, 2020 WL 5203340 (D. Md. September 1, 2020); […]
December 25, 2020

No Sanctions Despite Truncated Search

In In Re: Smith & Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (Bhr) Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2775, Master Docket No. 1:17-md-2775 (D. Md. Dec. 23, 2020), the Court denied a sanctions motion, attributing a failure to produce  an inconsistent email to search parameters that were too narrow.  The Court held that […]
December 20, 2020

Burden of Proof of Spoliation

“The burden of proof on a motion for spoliation sanctions is unsettled.”  Steves & Sons, Inc. v. JELD-WEN, Inc., 327 F.R.D. 96, 104 (E.D. Va. 2018). Two recent District of Maryland decisions have held that, at least where a relatively harsh sanction is involved, a clear and convincing standard applies: “The burden […]
August 18, 2012

News Report: Mr. Mark T. Pappas of Victor Stanley v. Creative Pipe “Fame” Denied Bail

The Maryland Daily Record reports that Mr. Mark T. Pappas, protagonist in the “Victor Stanley case,” was denied bail “because of his ‘long history’ of noncompliance [with Court orders] and ‘lack of candor’ in the [Victor Stanley] litigation.  Ben Mook, “Back from Belize, Pappas denied bail,” The Daily Record, Aug. 15, 2012.  […]