Over the past decade, the law governing litigants’ obligations to preserve and collect electronic discovery materials has developed substantially. Much of this development was spearheaded by a series of leading decisions issued by federal district court Judge Shira A. Scheindlin in a long-running litigation known as Zubulake.[FOOTNOTE 1] Recently, Scheindlin — in a new ruling that she entitled “Zubulake Revisited: Six Years Later” — held that many of the document preservation and collection obligations that were first recognized in Zubulake and its progeny by now had become so well established that litigants’ failure to comply with them warranted severe sanctions, both monetary and substantive. Her ruling, in Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 11, 2010), sounds yet another wake-up call to litigants about the seriousness and alacrity with which they must address document preservation and collection once litigation reasonably can be anticipated.

Pension Committee involved 13 plaintiffs, all of whom were found to be negligent in meeting their e-discovery obligations so as to cause relevant documents to be lost or destroyed. Monetary sanctions were imposed on all 13 of these plaintiffs.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]