Pretrial practice and discovery are critical stages of the litigation process, as they allow parties to gather and exchange information relevant to the case before it goes to trial. In recent years, the issue of e-discovery has become increasingly prevalent in pretrial practice, as more information is stored electronically. This has led to significant changes in how parties manage discovery, as well as how courts interpret and apply the rules governing e-discovery.
A case that highlights these challenges is Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, No. 1:2011cv01279 (S.D.N.Y 2012). In this case, the plaintiff, a former employee of the defendant, brought an employment-discrimination-and-retaliation lawsuit against her former employer. During the discovery process, the defendant argued that the plaintiff’s request for electronic documents was overly broad and unduly burdensome. The court ultimately agreed and ordered the defendant to produce only a limited set of electronic documents.
The Da Silva Moore case illustrates the importance of proportionality in e-discovery. The court recognized that, while the defendant had a duty to preserve and produce relevant electronic documents, the plaintiff’s request was so broad and burdensome that it outweighed the potential benefits of producing all the requested documents. This decision demonstrates that, to avoid disputes over e-discovery, parties must be mindful of proportionality when making requests for electronic documents.
The Da Silva Moore court also addressed the issue of cost shifting. The court ordered the defendant to bear the cost of producing the electronic documents, but also noted that the plaintiff may be required to reimburse the defendant for certain costs if the plaintiff ultimately loses the case. This highlights the importance of considering not only the breadth of the discovery sought but the potential the costs of that discovery, for both for the requesting party and the producing party.
To mitigate the challenges of e-discovery, it is essential for attorneys and their clients to be proactive in identifying and preserving electronic documents that may be relevant to the case. Read More
Robert Weinberg authored “Pennsylvania’s Hottest Case is: Belke v. Belke (Pa. Super. 2022)” published in Pennsylvania Family Lawyer, Winter 2022, Vol. 44, Issue 4. Read More
Pittsburgh family law attorney Ken Horoho talks about high net worth divorce, such as the case of NFL superstar Tom Brady and his ex-wife, Gisele Bündchen. In this podcast, Mr. Horoho talks about the importance of prenuptial and post-nuptial agreements, and having a financial planning team in place to protect the interests of both spouses.
Gentile, Horoho & Avalli · High Net Worth Divorce
Source Read More
Pietragallo partner was recently published in For The Defense, a publication of the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (PACDL). Her article, entitled The Hyde Amendment- A Seldom Used, Seldom Granted But Powerful Tool, has been published in Vol. 7, Issue 4 of the editorial, a link to which can be found below.
The article provides a detailed description of the Hyde Amendment, a tool available to criminal defendants to claim attorneys’ fees following a vexatious and frivolous prosecution.
The article can be read here. Read More
Takeaway: Hackers cannot be underestimated, and companies need to take cybersecurity policy seriously.
Earlier this year, a massive Twitter data breach occurred. Researchers are learning that the data breach was significantly more severe than initially reported.
In the first reports, one hacker was suspected of exploiting a vulnerability within the system. The vulnerability exposed subscribers’ Twitter IDs, login names, names, phone numbers, and email addresses.
It is now known that several hackers downloaded personal data using the same vulnerability. Reports are showing a new list containing the data of millions of Twitter subscribers. This new list is different from the earlier reported list which contained 5.4 million records. What’s worse is that the 5.4 million record list is currently being shared for free with other hackers. And there is, additionally, a list of 1.4 million subscribers with suspended Twitter accounts whose information is being exploited.
Most websites have data tracking, and the tracking is collected to generate personalized marketing. Women and men usually experience marketing tailored depending on gender. This data can also be sold to governments. And the number of trackers can vary by site. One can expect a retailer to have more tackers than say, for example, a non-profit.
Interestingly, a recent survey found that the number of trackers may also reflect the attitude organizations have towards privacy depending on where you are situated in the world. Websites in Hong Kong have on average 45 trackers, the highest average worldwide. Websites in the United States have on average 33 trackers, the third-highest average. While websites in Canada have on average 16 trackers, the eighth highest average.
Internet users can limit the number of trackers by adjusting their privacy settings, regularly deleting cookies, clearing out their cache, and enabling their browser’s “do not track” feature. Companies, however, must actively participate with their internal cybersecurity and legal departments providing services to ensure that patches are regularly being run, employees are being educated on cybersecurity risks, policies are continuously updated, etc. Read More
Kenneth J. Horoho, has been appointed to the Neighborhood Legal Services Association (“NLSA”) Board of Directors. NLSA is a non-profit organization that provides civil legal representation for the poor and disadvantaged in Allegheny, Beaver, Butler and Lawrence Counties. It is part of a statewide network of legal service providers servicing all of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties. Read More
Kenneth Horoho will moderate the Allegheny County Bar Association’s program entitled “The Surveillance of a Spouse” on November 14, 2022. He will be joined by speakers Phillip DiLucente of Phil DiLucente & Associates, LLC, The Honorable Anthony Mariani of Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Criminal Division, and Larry Forletta of Forletta Consulting and Investigative Services.
This program covers the do’s and don’ts of surveillance in family law matters, with an update on Pennsylvania’s wiretapping law.
More information can be found in this issue of the Lawyers Journal, page 7.
Read More
Takeaway: When a cybersecurity-related incident occurs, an insured should not automatically assume a standard commercial general liability (CGL) policy issued by an insurer will cover their losses, as CGL policies generally afford coverage to an insured for losses resulting from bodily injury and property damage. An insured’s cybersecurity losses can encompass much more, such as losses arising from a data breach concerning confidential or personal information of a client or customer, i.e., third parties who fall outside of the scope of an insured’s traditional CGL policy. Therefore, to ensure cyber coverage exists in the wake of a cyber incident, an insured should make certain that potential cyber-related losses are included within the “four corners” of the underlying insurance policy to secure a defense and, more importantly, coverage from an insurer.
Key Point: In determining whether there is a duty to defend, a court must follow the “Eight Corners” Rule and look at the “four corners” of the complaint and the “four corners” of the underlying insurance policies.[1] In other words, an insurer is obligated to defend its insured if the factual allegations of the complaint, on its face, encompass an injury that is actually or potentially within the scope of the policy.[2]
Discussion: Recently, an increasing number of legal battles over whether losses related to cybersecurity incidents are covered by an insured’s policy have tested the applicability of the underlying policy. For example, an Eleventh Circuit panel addressed whether a ‘computer fraud’ policy issued by Great American Insurance Company to Interactive Communications International, Inc. and HI Technology Corp. (together, “InComm”) excluded coverage for losses involving fraud.[3] InComm sold “chits” – each of which had a specific monetary value – to consumers, who can then “redeem” them by loading their value onto a debit card.[4] Between November 2013 and May 2014, InComm lost $11.4 million when fraudsters manipulated a glitch in InComm’s computerized interactive-telephone system that enabled them to redeem chits multiple times, with each duplicative redemption of an already-redeemed chit defrauding InComm of the chit’s value.[5] Read More
On October 18, 2022, Robert D. Weinberg presented on Avoiding the Parental Trap to the Children’s Issues Subcommittee of the Family Law Section of the Allegheny County Bar Association. This panel discussion stemmed from an article he authored entitled Avoiding the Parental Trap, which appeared in the Summer 2022 Volume of the Pennsylvania Family Lawyer. The other panelists included Dr. Eric Bernstein, a forensic psychologist based in Pittsburgh, and Dr. Ruth Zitner, a practicing psychologist with a focus on reunification therapy, based out of Washington, D.C. Mr. Weinberg and the participants covered a wide range of concerns including best practices in thinking about alienation allegations, best practices in terms of both litigation and treatment approaches, and generally placing parental alienation in the context of overarching family dynamics. Read More
U.S. News & World Report recognizes Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP as a 2023 Tier 1 Metro “Best Law Firm” in twelve practice areas in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. These twelve practice areas are:
Commercial Litigation (PGH & PHL)
Employment Law – Individuals (PHL)
Health Care Law (PHL)
Insurance Law (PGH)
Litigation – Labor & Employment (PGH & PHL)
Litigation – Health Care (PGH)
Litigation – Insurance (PGH)
Litigation – Trusts & Estates (PGH)
Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Plaintiffs (PGH)
Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (PGH)
Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants (PGH) and
Product Liability Litigation – Defendants (PGH)
In addition to the Tier 1 Metro ratings, Pietragallo was named:
Tier 2 Metro in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia in the practice areas of Bet-the-Company Litigation, Criminal Defense: White-Collar, Employment Law – Management, Litigation – Intellectual Property, and Professional Malpractice Law – Defendants.
Tier 3 Metro in Pittsburgh and West Palm Beach in the practice areas of Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Construction Law, Litigation – Construction, Criminal Defense: General Practice, and Criminal Defense: White-Collar
Pietragallo has also been named as Tier 2 across the nation in Litigation – Labor & Employment and Tier 3 nationally for our work in Commercial Litigation and Health Care Law.
The U.S. News & World Report’s “Best Law Firms” rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading attorneys in their field, and review of additional information provided by law firms as part of the formal submission process. Clients were asked to provide feedback on firm practice groups, addressing: expertise, responsiveness, understanding of a business and its needs, cost-effectiveness, civility, and whether they would refer another client to the firm. Lawyers also voted on expertise, responsiveness, integrity, cost-effectiveness, whether they would refer a matter to a firm, and if they consider a firm a worthy competitor. Read More
