What the Supreme Court Just Said About the Recovery of E-Discovery Costs

What the Supreme Court Just Said About the Recovery of E-Discovery Costs

Above The Law’s Mike Quartararo has an interesting analysis of Rimini Street, Inc. et al vs. Oracle USA, Inc., et al., a copyright infringement case brought by Oracle against one of its competitors. Previously, Oracle had been awarded $50 million in damages, $28 million in attorneys’ fees, $4.9 million in costs, and $12.8 million in litigation expenses. By the time the case ended up at the Supreme Court, only the litigation expenses were in dispute.

This is of interesting for those of us in e-discovery because the litigation fees included e-discovery expenses.

In the end, the court unanimously ruled against Oracle, citing a more limited views of recoverable expenses—only those specified in the general costs statute, §§1821 and 1920.

While the opinion seems to “bring an end to prevailing parties recovering costs related to eDiscovery,” Quarataro still believes there is confusion concerning what exactly is recoverable. Without a fix written into law, we will probably see the confusion continue.

Want to learn more? Read the article below:

Photo Illustration by Data Narro. Supreme Court Photo provided by Tim Sackton.