Costs

Award of Costs for ESI

January 1, 2026

Fee Recovery for ESI Protocol in Class Action

Flynn-Murphy v. Jaguar Land Rover of N. Amer., LLC, 2025 WL 3771284 (D.N.J. Dec. 31, 2025)(unpublished), was before the court on Class Counsel’s Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses, and Class Representative Service Awards. Plaintiffs asserted defective turbochargers in Defendants’ vehicles and that they cause expensive damage.  After […]
July 23, 2025

Decision on How to Best Search for ESI – Court Orders ESI Protocol in “Epic of Dysfunctional Discovery,” With Unique Clawback Provision

In a case where the plaintiff seeks $24,000,000 in damages, the court stated: “Today we write the next chapter in this litigation, a case which threatens to become an epic of dysfunctional discovery…. The parties have long been embroiled in contentious discovery disputes.” Everlast Roofing, Inc. v. Wilson, 2025 WL 1959345 (M.D. […]
February 15, 2025

Does a Settlement Agreement That is Silent on a Fee Claim Waive a Judicially-Reserved Claim for Attorneys’ Fees Based on a Discovery Violation?

Farace v. Cross, 2025 WL 484543 (Appl. Ct. Md. Feb. 13, 2025)(unreported), arose out of a tragedy – – the death of both parents of a two-year-old child in an auto accident.  Both sets of grandparents then sought custody. In this unreported decision, the Court addressed a novel[1] Maryland issue where out-of-State […]
February 11, 2025

Cross-Motions to Compel in Employment Lawsuit

In Cooper v. Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., 2025 WL 404246 (D. Md. Feb. 5, 2025)(Coulson, J.), Ms. Cooper sued BG&E and another employer for sexual harassment and discrimination.[1] The Court resolved cross-motions to compel.  Both discovery motions were granted in part and denied in part. The decision reflects the fact-specific nature […]
November 27, 2024

What “Expenses” Can a Non-Party Recover for Complying With a Discovery Subpoena?

In OL Private Counsel, LLC v. Olson, 2024 WL 4839277 (D. Utah Nov. 20, 2024), the court addressed recovery of expenses by non-parties for responding to a subpoena. Fed.R.Civ.P. 45 (“Subpoena”) states: (b)(1) – Under some circumstances, witness fees and mileage must be paid.[1] (d)(1) – “A party or attorney responsible for […]
June 3, 2022

Historical ESI Highlights – Part XI – Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan

When it comes to ESI, it has been stated that: “The fuss is about money. Discovery is expensive, and electronic discovery is really expensive.”[1] The award of litigation costs will never be the stuff of cocktail party discussions.  However, in many cases, large sums of money are at issue. See, e.g., Ralph […]
March 24, 2022

Maryland Appellate Decision Permitting Limited Forensic Search of Non-Parties’ Cell Phones

In St. Francis Academy, et al. v. Gilman School, Inc., No. 1390 (Md. Ct. Spl. Apls. Mar. 21, 2022) (unreported), the intermediate appellate court affirmed an order directing forensic imaging and searching of non-parties’ cell phones under a strict protocol to protect the cell phone owners’ privacy.  It carefully balanced the discovering […]
March 12, 2022

UPDATE:  Recovery of ESI Costs:  “The fuss is about money…. [E]lectronic discovery is really expensive.”

Taxation of costs in federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. §1920.  An ABA Litigation Section article, W. Newman, Prevailing Parties Recover Some, Not All, E-discovery Costs (americanbar.org) (ABA Winter 2022), cited a recent decision and noted that “ABA Litigation Section leaders believe this decision reveals that section 1920 is out of […]
August 10, 2021

District of Maryland Gives Qualified Approval to Non-Forensic Downloads of Social Media Data

Many social media programs provide their members with a non-forensic download tool.  For example, Google Takeout, Uber, Twitter, and LinkedIn provide download instructions.  See C. Ball, “Preserving Social Media Content: DIY (Dec. 24, 2019). However, those tools may not provide the same information that a forensic download collects. In Allen v. PPE […]
February 13, 2021

Recovery of ESI Costs: “The fuss is about money…. [E]lectronic discovery is really expensive.”

In 2012, the Supreme Court’s Kan Pacific decision narrowed the scope of costs that may be awarded in federal cases.  “Taxation of E-Discovery Costs Under 28 U.S.C. §1920(4) after Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan” (Aug. 14, 2012).  In that blog, I suggested: When it comes to electronically stored information (“ESI”), “[t]he fuss […]
August 14, 2012

Taxation of E-Discovery Costs Under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1920(4) after Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan

UPDATED February 13, 2021: “Recovery of ESI Costs: ‘The fuss is about money…. [E]lectronic discovery is really expensive.’” Note: This post was first published in “The Daily Record” on Aug. 12, 2012.  The original may be viewed by clicking here. * * * * When it comes to electronically stored information (“ESI”), […]