Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
The world was a far different place in 1849, when Henry David Thoreau opined (in an admittedly broader context) that “[t]he process of discovery is very simple.”1 That hopeful maxim has given way to rapid technological advances, requiring new solutions to old problems. The issue presented here is one such problem, recast in light of current technology: To what extent is inaccessible electronic data discoverable, and who should pay for its production?
I. INTRODUCTION
The Supreme Court recently reiterated that our “simplified notice pleading standard…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Touche Ross & Co. v. RedingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Rowe Entertainment, Inc. v. William Morris Agency, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by108 opinions
- Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. CammarataDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2010
- Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- R.F.M.A.S., Inc. v. SoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- Wachtel v. Health Net, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2006
103 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.