Author: Gibbons P.C.

NJ Courts Allow Internet Usage in Court

Imagine you are in a New Jersey courtroom and have begun the jury selection process. When presented with one of the prospective jurors, you think that you have read about him or her in a recent article. As a result, you open your laptop and begin to surf the Internet to research the individual, but your adversary objects, stating that he or she does not have a computer. Will the judge rule in your favor? The answer is “yes” based upon the Appellate Division’s recent opinion in Carino v. Muenzen, 2010 N.J. Super Unpub. LEXIS 2154 (App. Div. Aug. 30, 2010).

“Private” Facebook and MySpace Postings are Discoverable

A New York trial court has ordered a personal injury plaintiff to produce her Facebook and MySpace postings, notwithstanding that plaintiff self-designated them as private. Justice Jeffrey Arlen Spinner, in Romano v. Steelcase Inc., 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 20388, 2010 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4538 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty. Sept. 21, 2010), reasoned that New York’s “liberal discovery policies” favored allowing access to posts that might undermine plaintiff’s claim for loss of enjoyment of life and further that, “as neither Facebook nor MySpace guarantee complete privacy, Plaintiff has no legitimate reasonable expectation of privacy.”

NJDEP Proposes Relief From Site Remediation Reform Act Requirements

On October 4, 2010, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) formally proposed revisions to the Site Remediation Reform Act’s (SRRA) interim rules. The revisions impact two important components of the interim rules: remediation deadlines and vapor intrusion investigations. These technical amendments are based upon stakeholder input and are intended to reduce the burden on the regulated community and New Jersey’s newly minted Licensed Site Remediation Professionals (LSRPs).

Gibbons to Host 4th Annual E-Discovery Conference – October 28, 2010

The Gibbons E-Discovery Task Force will host its fourth annual full day E-Discovery Conference on October 28, 2010, in the firm’s Newark, NJ office. Devoted to the latest developments in electronic discovery and corporate information management, this program will include speakers who are among the most respected names in the e-discovery field, including former United States Magistrate judges John Hughes and Ronald Hedges, e-discovery authority Michael Arkfeld, and representatives of leading corporations and e-discovery service providers.

Mt. Hawley and the Cost-Saving and Practical Benefits of Fed. R. Evid. 502

The decision in Mt. Hawley Insurance Company v. Felman Production, Inc. demonstrates the importance of a court-approved stipulation regarding the production of electronically stored information (“ESI”). The court in Mt. Hawley found that the plaintiff had waived the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine for certain documents because counsel had failed to take “reasonable precautions” to ensure that such otherwise privileged documents were not inadvertently disclosed. Such precautions should have included, for example, sampling its production and not delaying to recover privileged documents after their production was known. Importantly, the parties had not agreed to a non-waiver provision when negotiating the production of ESI, as permitted by Fed. R. Evid. 502 (“Rule 502”). Magistrate Judge Stanley’s decision ultimately was affirmed by Judge Robert C. Chambers in Felman Productions, Inc. v. Industrial Risk Insurers.

Willful Destruction of Electronic Evidence Can Lead to Jail Time

In Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93644 (D. Md. Sept. 9, 2010), Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm sanctioned Defendants CPI and Mark Pappas, its president – and threatened to imprison Pappas – for the willful destruction of evidence and violation of his discovery orders. The Court’s lengthy decision gives a comprehensive analysis of preservation and spoliation issues across the federal circuits that will benefit every practitioner and corporate litigant.

Attendance and Outlook Improve at Philadelphia ICSC

Attendance was up and the mood was upbeat at the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) PA/NJ/DE Idea Exchange on September 15-16 at the Pennsylvania Convention Center in Philadelphia. For the 7th consecutive year, Gibbons P.C. exhibited at the show. Five Gibbons lawyers, from the firm’s Philadelphia and Newark offices, attended.

Gibbons Launches Apprenticeship Program – First Apprentice Assigned to Firm’s Intellectual Property Department

Gibbons P.C. has launched an apprenticeship program to help maximize the value of its legal and client services while also providing a solid training ground for new attorneys. John Cahill will serve as the firm’s first apprentice, working in the Intellectual Property Department. “Gibbons is committed to anticipating client concerns and offering creative, proactive solutions,” says Patrick C. Dunican Jr., Chairman and Managing Director of the firm. “Given current economic realities, our attorney hiring and training practices should directly address their impact on the fees we bill our clients—though staffing client matters efficiently with the highest quality legal talent remains the most important strategy in controlling costs and increasing value.”

The Lighter Side of LSRP: Opportunity to Reduce Remediation Funding Source in New Jersey

With the advent of New Jersey’s LSRP program comes an added financial benefit for environmental remediation matters requiring a remediation funding source (“RFS”). There is an opportunity to save on the statutory annual 1% surcharge on an RFS, especially useful for those sites subject to the requirements of the Industrial Site Recovery Act.

Google, Google, Toil and Twitter, Facebook Burn and Jurors Babble – The Internet in the Courtroom

A Michigan court dismissed a juror who during the trial posted on Facebook, “gonna be fun to tell defendant they’re guilty.” A New Jersey Appellate Court holds it is alright to google jurors’ names during jury selection. Carino v. Muenzen, App. Div. August 30, 2010. The upshot is that the internet is moving into the jury box. In Carino, the plaintiff’s attorney used the court’s wi-fi to access the internet on his laptop. The court, ever hip, asked if he was googling the potential jurors. The trial court told him to put away the computer because he gave no notice he intended to google the jurors.