By Doug Austin
\r\n
In Burd v. Ford Motor Co., Case No. 3:13-cv-20976 (S.D. W. Va. July 8, 2015), West Virginia Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert granted the plaintiff’s motion for a deposition of a Rule 30(b)(6) witness on the defendant’s search and collection methodology, but did not rule on the issue of whether the defendant had a reasonable collection process or adequate production, denying the plaintiff’s motion as “premature” on that request.
\r\n
Case Background
\r\n
In these cases involving alleged events…
Related Stories
- Court Denies Plaintiff’s Request for Spoliation Sanctions, as Most Documents Destroyed Before Duty to Preserve: eDiscovery Case Law
- This Study Discusses the Benefits of Including Metadata in Machine Learning for TAR: eDiscovery Trends
- Similar Spoliation Case, Somewhat Different Outcome: eDiscovery Case Law
