Posts Tagged “Motion to Compel”

Commonwealth v. Jones, SJC-12564 (Mass. Mar. 6, 2019)

Key Insight: Whether compelling the defendant to enter his cell phone password would violate his privilege against self incrimination under 5th Amendment and art. 12 of Mass Declaration of Rights Nature of Case: Trafficking a person for sexual servitude Electronic Data Involved: data held on cell phone Keywords: Cell phone password, 5th Amendment Identified State […]

D.M. v. Wesley Med. Ctr. LLC (D. Kan, 2019)

Key Insight: Privileged docs based on only state law must be produced in a case with both federal and state claims Nature of Case: Medical malpractice Electronic Data Involved: Responsive documents Keywords: Privilege, state law Identified State Rule(s): K.S.A. section 65-4925(a) Identified Federal Rule(s): FRCP 26(b)  

Dulcich Inc. v. USI Insurance Services National, Inc., No. 18-cv-01089 (D. Ore, 2019)

Key Insight: The attorney-client privilege for legal invoices is implicitly waived when those invoices are the primary form of direct evidence for the lawsuit. Nature of Case: recovery of attorney costs incurred in prior suit Electronic Data Involved: legal invoices Keywords: legal invoices, implicit waiver Identified State Rule(s): ORS 40.225(2) Identified Federal Rule(s): FRCP 41(a)(1) […]

Alarm Grid, Inc. v. AlarmClub.com, Inc. (Southern District of Florida, 2018)

Key Insight: Recorded phone call between party and copyright agent regarding image timing confidential at prelitigation phase Nature of Case: copyright dispute Electronic Data Involved: phone call recording Keywords: protective order, confidential phone call, work-product Identified State Rule(s): FRBC Rule 4-4.1, 4-1.2 Identified Federal Rule(s): 26(b)(3), 37(a)(5) View Case Opinion

Alarm Grid, Inc. v. AlarmClub.com, Inc. (Southern District of Florida, 2018)

Key Insight: Recorded phone call between party and copyright agent regarding image timing confidential at prelitigation phase Nature of Case: copyright dispute Electronic Data Involved: phone call recording Keywords: protective order, confidential phone call, work-product Identified State Rule(s): FRBC Rule 4-4.1, 4-1.2 Identified Federal Rule(s): 26(b)(3), 37(a)(5) View Case Opinion

Addi v. Corvias Management-Army, LLC (D. Md. 2021)

Key Insight: Work-product privilege protects documents prepared in anticipation by a party, its attorneys, or its consultants and agents. A consulting expert’s analysis and reports is protected work product. However, a consulting expert becomes a fact witness when it also acts a scheduler, inspector, or remediator. No protection would apply to those activities. The capacity […]