From the Opinion:
“This opinion addresses both the scope of a litigant’s duty to preserve electronic documents and the consequences of a failure to preserve documents that fall within the scope of that duty.”
After UBS was ordered to produce documents from certain backup tapes, the parties discovered that certain tapes were missing. The court held that UBS was under a duty to preserve the backup tapes at issue.
Turning to remedies, the court declined to modify the cost-shifting order from Zubulake III or to give an adverse inference instruction to the jury. UBS was ordered to pay the cost of re-deposing certain witnesses.
The full text is available at http://info.h5.com…