Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. V. Cammarata Case Summary
Rimkus Consulting Group Inc. v. Cammarata (S.D. Tex. 2010 Evidence is relevant to litigation; when the party should have known that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation.
Pension Comm. of Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of Am. Sec., 685 F. Supp. 2d 456, 466 (S.D.N.Y. 2010); Chin v. Port Auth. of New York & New Jersey, 685 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2012). The plaintiff controls the timing of litigation.
Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata, 688 F. Supp. 2d 598, 641 (S.D. Tex. 2010). By seeking counsel or discussing litigation can automatically initiate the preservation of electronically stored information and documents in a possible litigation.
Napster, Inc. Copyright Litigation, 2006 WL 3050864 (N. D. Cal. 2006) (citing
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 2006 WL 565893 at *21 (N.D. Cal. 2006). Any future litigation must be “probable,” is held to mean “more than a possibility.
Silvestri v. Gen. Motors Corp. (4th Cir. 2001). “The duty to preserve material evidence arises not only during litigation. But during the period before litigation when a party should have known, that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation.”
Pension Comm. of Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of Am. Sec., 685 F. Supp. 2d 456, 466 (S.D.N.Y. 2010); Chin v. Port Auth. of New York & New Jersey, 685 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2012). The plaintiff controls the timing of litigation.
Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata, 688 F. Supp. 2d 598, 641 (S.D. Tex. 2010). By seeking counsel or discussing litigation can automatically initiate the preservation of electronically stored information and documents in a possible litigation.
Napster, Inc. Copyright Litigation, 2006 WL 3050864 (N. D. Cal. 2006) (citing
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 2006 WL 565893 at *21 (N.D. Cal. 2006). Any future litigation must be “probable,” is held to mean “more than a possibility.
Silvestri v. Gen. Motors Corp. (4th Cir. 2001). “The duty to preserve material evidence arises not only during litigation. But during the period before litigation when a party should have known, that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation.”