In an order Friday, Judge Peck enforced as a binding contract the terms of a settlement negotiated over email in a case against former Mets star Lenny Dykstra.  The plaintiff managed Mr. Dykstra’s social media presence, including “dealing with the fallout from Dykstra’s boorish behavior,” and claims to have not been paid (see complaint here).

Mr. Dykstra’s lawyer had written “we have a deal” in an email chain with settlement terms but later argued that the terms also needed to include a “standard” mutual release.  Judge Peck disagreed:
Continue Reading Judge Peck: “We Have a Deal” Email from Lenny Dykstra’s Lawyer Creates a Binding Settlement

Magistrate Judge Peck, a widely recognized expert on e-discovery, published an opinion today approving a stipulated protocol for technology-assisted review of documents (or “TAR”). The opinion is notable because it contains a clear statement supporting a party’s right to choose TAR: “the case law has developed to the point that it is now black letter law that where the producing party wants to utilize TAR for document review, courts will permit it.” The opinion is also notable because it discusses one open issue in the TAR case law — the extent to which the parties must share information about their “seed” sets of documents — and because it attaches the parties’ protocol as guidance for practitioners. The key discussion is here:
Continue Reading Judge Peck Publishes, For Guidance to Practitioners, Parties’ Protocol for Technology-Assisted Document Review

Magistrate Judge Peck today denied the plaintiffs’ rather aggressive motion to recuse him in the gender discrimination case that we have covered at length. Judge Peck first determined the motion was untimely. He then ruled that his participation in ediscovery conferences and general support for predictive coding were not grounds for recusal:
Continue Reading Magistrate Judge Peck Denies Recusal Motion Relating to His Predictive Coding Advocacy

The temperature was just raised again in the motion to recuse Magistrate Judge Peck from the gender discrimination class action in which he broke new ground by formally authorizing predictive coding, and in which he (unsuccesfully) warned the plaintiffs to cease their “scorched earth” litigation tactics. (For prior posts on the case, click here.). The plaintiffs hired a judicial ethics expert who today moved for permission to file an amicus brief in support of recusal. In the proposed brief attached to the motion, the expert first took issue with Judge Peck issuing a decision endorsing predictive coding shortly after writing an article in favor of predictive coding:
Continue Reading Plaintiffs Hire Ethics Expert to File Amicus Brief In “Scorched Earth” Recusal Motion