Murphy v. Target Products

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• refusing to impose a duty on an employer to preserve evidence relevant to its employee’s lawsuit against a third party
• refusing to impose a duty on an employer to preserve evidence relevant to its employee’s lawsuit against a third party
• “Prior to receiving a request as contemplated under [Rule 34(C) ], the non-party ought to have no legal concerns about potential evidence in his possession, absent ány' promises, contracts, statutes or special circumstances.”
• “Prior to receiving a request as contemplated under [Rule 34(C)], the non-party ought to have no legal concerns about potential evidence in his possession, absent any promises, contracts, statutes or special circumstances.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).