NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF

Transcription

1 Jeffrey L. Oing, J.S.C NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF NEW YORK Electronic Discovery Order Roland Lorie and JerryEhrenwald Meet and Confer. October 6, 2016 Vazon Investment S.A. Isabelle Mercier-Dalphond Jerry Ehrenwald & IGI NY Michael Munoz Roland Lorie Charles Michael

2 Unresolved Issues: Summary of Dispute Plaintiff Vazon Investments S.A. ("Vazon"), a 50% shareholder of nominal defendant International Gemological Institute, Inc. ("IGI NY"), brought this lawsuit both individually on its own behalf and derivatively on behalf of IGI NY against defendants Roland Lorie and Jerry Ehrenwald -- the only two directors and two of the three officers of IGI NY -- seeking equitable and monetary relief for their breach of fiduciary duty, mismanagement, waste of corporate assets and abuse of control, as well as punitive damages for defendants' willful, wanton and/or reckless misconduct. Excess of $5 million IGI and Ehrenwald IGI and Ehrenwald deny the allegations and claims contained in the Complaint. Additionally, among other defenses, IGI and Ehrenwald assert that some or all of the claims in the Complaint are barred by statutes of limitations and by the doctrines of waiver, laches and/or equitable estoppel; Plaintiff and/or the person purporting to have caused Plaintiff to commence this action lack standing or authority to assert some or all of the claims in the Complaint; and that Plaintiff and/or the Person purporting to have caused Plaintiff to commence this action do not fairly represent the interests of IGI NY and/or its shareholders, in part because the Person purporting to have caused Plaintiff to commence this action is furthering the interests of non-party Marc Brauner. Roland Lorié Mr. Lorié denies the allegations of the complaint. His defenses include the fact that the person bringing the suit on behalf of Vazon, Arsene Kronshagen, lacks the authority to do so and would in all events be an inadequate shareholder representative, because he is acting to further the private interests of Marc Brauner.

3 Preservation (22 NYCRR (c)(3)(a),(c) and (g)-(i)) Each party shall be responsible for taking reasonable and proportional steps to preserve ESI within its possession, custody or control. Each party shall instruct persons related to such party who may have ESI relevant to claims and defenses at issue to preserve such ESI, including suspension of data or records destruction and auto-deletion policies. The parties agree to preserve ESI from January 1, 2000 to present (on a going forward basis). Production22 NYCRR (c)(3)(e),(d) Parties will produce responsive material as single-page.tiff files accompanied with extracted text and standard metadata. Production will be in a format that the information can be loaded into standard e-discovery database software (such as Relativity or Concordance), with no less functionality as would be available to the producing party. Parties agree to only produce metadata fields to the extent such fields already exist. Documents will be designated with Bates number and appropriate confidential designation, in accordance with the parties confidentiality agreement so ordered by the Court.

4 Excel and PowerPoint ESI shall be produced in their native format. Hard copies may be produced as PDFs instead of.tiff files (though otherwise in accordance with the specification above). Privileged documents Identification. Where appropriate, parties shall use categorical designations in privilege logs, as set forth in Rule 11-b of the Rules of the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court. If any party believes in good faith that deficiencies exist in another party's categorical descriptions, such party may make reasonable requests for a document-by-document listing on the privilege log, in which event the requirements set forth in CPLR 3122 shall be followed by the producing party. The producing party may seek a protective order pursuant to CPLR 3103 and/or costs incurred in preparing the document-by-document log, as set forth in Rule 11-b. Parties shall not be required to log communications exclusively among litigation counsel and their clients, or among co-defense counsel, occurring after the complaint was filed, except that Plaintiff shall log any communications that include Marc Brauner that Plaintiff contends are protected from production, even those occurring after such date.

5 Inadvertent Production / Claw-back agreements. If a producing party determines that it has produced information or documents, whether in electronic, hard-copy, or any other form, that is subject to a claim of privilege or otherwise protected from disclosure, the party making the claim may notify any party that received the information of the claim and the basis for it. After being notified, a receiving party must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies it has; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if the receiving party disclosed it before being notified; and may promptly present the information to the Court under seal for a determination of the claim. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved. An inadvertent production shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver or forfeiture-in this case or any other action or proceeding-of any claim of privilege that the producing party would be entitled to assert with respect to the information or documents and their subject matter. Cost of Production. Cost Each party shall bear its own cost of preservation, collection, review, production, and restoration (if necessary) of ESI. The parties, however, reserve their right to seek burden-shifting or reimbursement for such costs by motion. The Parties reserve their right to seek attorneys' fees and costs after judgment, pursuant to any applicable contractual provisions. Allocation:

6 OtherIssues SO ORDERED: