Connection lost
Server error
Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A company failed to preserve backup e-mail tapes after litigation was anticipated. The court denied a severe “adverse inference” sanction because the plaintiff could not prove the lost e-mails were favorable, but established key rules for the duty to preserve electronic data.
Legal Significance: This landmark e-discovery case established the scope of a party’s duty to preserve electronic data, including the duty to implement a “litigation hold” for key players’ data, and clarified the standards for spoliation sanctions like the adverse inference instruction.
Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Laura Zubulake sued her employer, UBS Warburg LLC, for gender discrimination and retaliation, alleging that crucial evidence existed in e-mails stored on the company’s backup tapes. During discovery, it was revealed that UBS had failed to preserve several backup tapes containing e-mails from “key players”—Zubulake’s supervisors, coworkers, and relevant human resources personnel. The court determined that UBS’s duty to preserve evidence attached in April 2001, when its employees first anticipated litigation, which was months before Zubulake filed her formal EEOC charge in August 2001. Despite oral instructions from counsel to preserve documents, UBS employees failed to do so, and certain backup tapes that should have been retained under UBS’s own three-year retention policy were destroyed. Other tapes, containing data from after the EEOC charge was filed, were also missing. Zubulake moved for sanctions against UBS for spoliation of evidence, seeking, among other things, an adverse inference instruction against UBS.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Under what circumstances is an adverse inference instruction an appropriate sanction for a party’s failure to preserve electronic evidence, specifically data stored on backup tapes?
The court denied the motion for an adverse inference instruction but granted Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla paria
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Under what circumstances is an adverse inference instruction an appropriate sanction for a party’s failure to preserve electronic evidence, specifically data stored on backup tapes?
Conclusion
This opinion, often called Zubulake IV, provides a foundational framework for e-discovery, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitat
Legal Rule
A party seeking an adverse inference instruction for spoliation must prove: (1) Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et
Legal Analysis
The court first established the scope of the duty to preserve electronic Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui o
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The duty to preserve evidence attaches upon the **reasonable anticipation of