Skip to content
DWT logo
People Services Insights
About Offices Careers
Search
People
Services
Insights
About
Offices
Careers
Search
Publications
Securities & Derivative Litigation

Judge Sets Strict Discovery Standard for In-House Attorneys

By John A. Goldmark
January 2013
Share
Print this page

A federal judge in Coquina Investments v. Rothstein [2012 WL 3202273 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 3, 2012, Case No. 10-60786)] levied harsh sanctions against TD Bank and its outside counsel for numerous discovery violations, including most notably, the failure to conduct an adequate internal search for documents. Coquina involved a high-profile case regarding TD Bank’s alleged assistance with a Ponzi scheme that resulted in a $67 million verdict against the bank. The judge issued a post-trial order against the bank and its counsel for negligently failing to turn over relevant documents. The ruling criticized the bank’s failure to produce documents in their native format, which led to the loss of key information in the discovery production, and the lack of coordination among its many attorneys. 

The Association of Corporate General Counsel (ACC), a global bar association for in-house counsel, filed an amicus brief  in support of TD Bank’s appeal, urging the 11th Circuit to reverse the sanctions as creating an “impossible standard” for in-house counsel to follow during the discovery process. The ACC argues that holding the client responsible for errors in a discovery process that involves hundreds of attorneys and a high volume of documents sets an unrealistic precedent for in-house counsel and would have a chilling effect on how they operate. The lower court’s ruling, the ACC says, demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how in-house counsel work and the resources available for discovery.
 
This ruling is one of many recent discovery opinions throughout the country that emphasize the need for attorneys to work closely with their clients during the discovery process. It also highlights the importance of both preserving and producing documents in their native format to ensure relevant information is disclosed.  Finally, it suggests that corporate counsel should actively assist outside counsel in litigation and participate in searching for and producing relevant material.

Full January 2013 Quarterly Securities Enforcement Briefing

Related Articles

05.22.25
Insights
White Collar, Investigations & Government Controversies
DOJ Criminal Division Reveals New White-Collar Crime Enforcement Priorities and Corporate Enforcement Policies Read More
02.25.25
Insights
Healthcare
In Key Ruling, 1st Circuit Adopts "But-For" Causation Standard for FCA Claims Arising From Unlawful Kickbacks Read More
11.01.21
Advisories
White Collar, Investigations & Government Controversies
DOJ Announces Tougher Stance on Corporate Criminal Enforcement Read More
DWT logo
©1996-2025 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Not intended as legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Media Kit Affiliations Legal notices
Privacy policy Employees DWT Collaborate EEO
SUBSCRIBE
©1996-2025 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Attorney Advertising. Not intended as legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.