Attorney’s ​Delegation of Document Review to Non-Attorney Alone Not Contrary to Law

The court overruled defendant’s objections to the magistrate judge’s determination that plaintiff’s delegation of document review to a non-attorney was acceptable because defendant showed no legal error. “In the cases [defendant] cites where courts found delegation to be legal error, the parties presented more than speculation that responsive documents had not been produced. In National Ass’n of Radiation Survivors v. Turnage, 115 F.R.D. 543 (N.D. Cal. 1997), for example, plaintiff obtained particular documents responsive to its discovery requests outside of the discovery process; that these same documents had not been produced was evidence that defendants had not conducted a proper search or produced all responsive documents. . . . . And in Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., No. 05-CV-1958-B (BLM), 2010 WL 1336937, at *2 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 2, 2010), the court noted a number of deficiencies in collection efforts and an ‘incredible breakdown in communication’ between the party and its legal counsel; there were specific errors identified as a result of the lack of attorney supervision. [Defendant] has cited no authority to support the proposition that an attorney’s delegation of document review to a non-attorney representative, standing alone, supports a conclusion that the search was insufficient.”

Bal Seal Engineering, Inc v. Nelson Products, Inc et al, 8-13-cv-01880 (CACD 2018-07-09, Order) (Josephine L. Staton)

2018-07-11T11:55:03+00:00July 11th, 2018|Antitrust, Docket Report|