3 ms·

> Google stated that “it has come to our attention that the search terms that Google agreed to use for the litigation were mistakenly not run over all of the in

by rdtsc 3y ago

> Google stated that “it has come to our attention that the search terms that Google agreed to use for the litigation were mistakenly not run over all of the ingestion sites where the custodians’ documents are stored.” > So you’re talking about potentially five times what you’ve produced, and you’re saying you thought there was substantial completion done? It’s false. It wasn’t; was it?” (Id. at 55.) Well, what can you do? :shrug: Dogs eat homework papers, evidence slips and falls into shredders accidentally, unfortunate fires happen /s But really, what could the court really do in cases like this, a slap on the wrist fine and everyone goes home and promises to behave better next time.

toast0 3y ago
Courts can issue sanctions for failure to cooperate in discovery. There's a big list of possible sanctions here [1] under "Sanctions Sought in the District Where the Action Is Pending." I'm not qualified to guess at which if any of these sanctions might be granted in this case... But that's the kind of things available. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37 (added link, thanks)
- harry8 3y ago
  no link. But in that "big list of possible sanctions" is there anything that would inconvenience google as much as a $200 fine inconveninences someone on minimum wage? Is there anything at all that isn't just a trivial business expense dwarfed by what they will pay their lawyers just for this one case? Is there any risk of a human being held accountable for anything?
  - verve_rat 3y ago
    Ah, yeah. The possibilities include the judge just straight up ruling against Google in a summary judgement. The worst case scenario is Google just looses the case and the FTC gets whatever it has asked for. The likelihood of that happening is up for debate of course, but that is the very very very bad thing that could happen.
    - harry8 3y ago
      >FTC gets whatever it has asked for. And goes straight to appeal. What can the FTC even ask for? Jail terms for execs the way it happens to poor people who can't pay fines? Somehow I doubt the "very, very, very bad thing" could meet a materiality test in goog's P&L or balance sheet. >> is there anything that would inconvenience google as much as a $200 fine inconveniences someone on minimum wage? So do we have a /hard/ no on that yet?
    - avidiax 3y ago
      > The worst case scenario is Google just loses the case and the FTC gets whatever it has asked for. As a deterrent to failure to produce inculpating documents, "maybe" getting the same punishment as producing the documents faithfully falls rather short.
hfjjbf 3y ago
[dead]
adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
one of the things the court can issue as a sanction is that the opposing party can tell the jury "we don't know what information Google has because they deleted it, violating the court's order" the damage to your case in the eyes of the jury they're can be pretty damaging
salawat 3y ago
Adverse inference for one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference

by rdtsc 3y ago

toast0 3y ago

Courts can issue sanctions for failure to cooperate in discovery. There's a big list of possible sanctions here [1] under "Sanctions Sought in the District Where the Action Is Pending." I'm not qualified to guess at which if any of these sanctions might be granted in this case... But that's the kind of things available. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37 https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37 (added link, thanks)

harry8 3y ago
no link. But in that "big list of possible sanctions" is there anything that would inconvenience google as much as a $200 fine inconveninences someone on minimum wage? Is there anything at all that isn't just a trivial business expense dwarfed by what they will pay their lawyers just for this one case? Is there any risk of a human being held accountable for anything?
- verve_rat 3y ago
  Ah, yeah. The possibilities include the judge just straight up ruling against Google in a summary judgement. The worst case scenario is Google just looses the case and the FTC gets whatever it has asked for. The likelihood of that happening is up for debate of course, but that is the very very very bad thing that could happen.
  - harry8 3y ago
    >FTC gets whatever it has asked for. And goes straight to appeal. What can the FTC even ask for? Jail terms for execs the way it happens to poor people who can't pay fines? Somehow I doubt the "very, very, very bad thing" could meet a materiality test in goog's P&L or balance sheet. >> is there anything that would inconvenience google as much as a $200 fine inconveniences someone on minimum wage? So do we have a /hard/ no on that yet?
  - avidiax 3y ago
    > The worst case scenario is Google just loses the case and the FTC gets whatever it has asked for. As a deterrent to failure to produce inculpating documents, "maybe" getting the same punishment as producing the documents faithfully falls rather short.

hfjjbf 3y ago

[dead]

adgjlsfhk1 3y ago

one of the things the court can issue as a sanction is that the opposing party can tell the jury "we don't know what information Google has because they deleted it, violating the court's order" the damage to your case in the eyes of the jury they're can be pretty damaging

salawat 3y ago

Adverse inference for one. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_inference