Certain decisions from the past year suggest that New York courts addressing requests to shift costs in connection with e-discovery are more inclined to exercise their discretion under Article 31 of the CPLR to limit the scope of the requested e-discovery than they are to shift the costs of such discovery to the requesting party.
Historically, New York courts have held that the party requesting discovery, as opposed to the producing party, should incur the costs associated with the production of the requested discovery material. See Schroeder v. Centro Pariso Tropical, 233 A.D.2d 314 (2d Dep’t 1996); Rubin v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, 190 A.D.2d 661 (2d Dep’t 1993).
This content has been archived.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
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]
