Legal Commentary

The wake from Maryland's Chief Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm's September ruling in Victor Stanley II continues to generate nausea for defense lawyers and euphoria for plaintiffs attorneys.

Craig Ball detailed the ruling in the October issue of Law Technology News, describing Grimm's fury at the "unrelentingly abusive antics" of Mark Pappas, the principal of the defendant company in the copyright dispute. The judge threatened to toss Pappas in the slammer, carefully circumnavigating Rule 42 requirements that criminal contempt matters be referred to the U.S. Attorney or a private prosecutor. Grimm describes the defendant's actions as "the single most egregious example of spoliation that I have encountered ... in 14 years on the bench."

But the educational value of the case, says Ball, "outweighs its considerable entertainment value." Grimm uses the ruling "as a bully pulpit to teach the law of spoliation and sanctions," complete with a 12-page appendix.

Want more? Check out McDermott Will & Emery partner Geoffrey Vance's thoughtful analysis in Corporate Counsel magazine. And Gibson Dunn issued an alert on the case, here. A BNA analysis is here.