In a Fair Labor Standards Case against Butterball, the Plaintiffs claimed the Defendants’ ESI production was incomplete. The Defendants in turn claimed that the “burden” of producing the discovery was burdensome, justifying cost shifting. Helmert, et al., v. Butterball, LLC, 2010 U.S. Dist. Lexis 60777 (May 27, 2010).
While that sounds like a standard e-Discovery dispute, something was not right in the kitchen.
Searching for the Right Recipe
Search terms were an “iron chef-esq” battle in the case.
The Defendants ran search terms over active and archived email databases of twenty-two custodians. Helmert, at *4.
The Plaintiffs sought to compel the Defendants to run an additional 70 search terms over forty-three custodians. Helmert, at *9.
The two sides debated and narrowed search terms across a significant portion of the opinion, with the number of custodians and search terms fluctuating.
One element of the search term dispute was searching “Donning and Duffing” cases against one of the Defendants and its subsidiaries. Helmert, at *11.
To Continue Reading: Click Here
--------------------------------------------
Source: Bow Tie Law's Blog
By: Joshua Gilliland
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment