jdsupra.com: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/why-every-litigator-should-read-9020678/

Full text

3,000 chars

--> Why Every Litigator Should Read Staggers v. Medtronic Before the Next Rule 37(e) Motion | Association of Certified E-Discovery Specialists (ACEDS) - JDSupra Menu News & Insights Popular Labor & Employment Finance & Banking Intellectual Property Health & Healthcare Environmental Issues more… Business Insurance Commercial Real Estate Corporate Taxes Immigration Securities more… Personal Residential Real Estate Estate Planning Civil Rights Personal Taxes Bankruptcy more… Jump to: Latest Updates » Trending [ 7 ] [Survey] What do GC want from law firm guidance? Your input matters... [Hot Topic] Artificial Intelligence [Hot Topic] Employer Liability Issues Latest IMMIGRATION News & Updates Stay Informed: Popular Reads on JD Supra Meet JD Supra's Top Authors! Build a Morning News Digest: Easy, Custom Content, Free! Browse All Law News Topics » Find Author By Business Matters Labor & Employment Finance & Banking Intellectual Property Insurance Taxes See All Subjects » --> By Personal Issues Civil Rights Family Matters Personal Injury Wills, Trusts, & Estate Planning Worker’s Compensation See All Subjects » --> By Location California New York Texas Canada United Kingdom See All Locations » --> Subscribe Custom Email Digests Build a custom email digest by following topics, people, and firms published on JD Supra. X (formerly Twitter) RSS Feeds for Publishers For Reporters My Account Log In May 19, 2026 Why Every Litigator Should Read Staggers v. Medtronic Before the Next Rule 37(e) Motion Association of Certified E-Discovery Specialists (ACEDS) + Follow x Following x Following - Unfollow Contact LinkedIn Facebook X Send Embed To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog: [author Kelly Twigger]* [Editor’s Note: This article has been republished with permission. It was originally published May 13, 2026 on the Minerva26 Blog] Podcast | Transcript A word of warning — this one is longer than our usual posts, but definitely worth the read. Grab a beverage and dive in. The five-year stay that turned a routine migration into a sanctions order This case is one I want every litigator who advises corporate clients to read carefully. You’ve seen the rough outline of this fact pattern before, but the way it plays out in this decision is going to be quoted in spoliation motions for years. A False Claims Act qui tam suit is filed in 2015 and served in August 2016. Within weeks, the defendant places more than 300 custodians on legal hold and is doing what every sophisticated information governance program is supposed to do. Documented process. Suspended retention policy on flagged accounts. A written escalation path for additions. Two months after service, the Court stays discovery on a motion to dismiss. That stay holds for more than five years, until late December 2021. While the litigation is paused, the defendant’s IT team runs a planned enterprise project that has noth

More on this subject

• 6pr.com.au: https://www.6pr.com.au/koonenberry-gold-its-one-of-them-an-historic-gold-copper-project-with-geological-goodies-everywhere/ 2026-05-22
• 3aw.com.au: https://www.3aw.com.au/koonenberry-gold-its-one-of-them-an-historic-gold-copper-project-with-geological-goodies-everywhere/ 2026-05-22
• scoop.co.nz: https://auckland.scoop.co.nz/2026/05/new-year-honours-recipients-recognised-2/ 2026-05-22
• scoop.co.nz: https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK2605/S00480/new-year-honours-recipients-recognised.htm 2026-05-21
• theguardian.com: https://www.theguardian.com/info/2014/oct/22/the-guardian-us-team 2026-05-19