Electronic Discovery Law

Posted at 7:10 AM on December 15, 2004 by K&L Gates

Court Denies Motion to Compel Production of Electronic Versions of Previously Produced Hard Copy

McNally Tunneling Corp. v. City of Evanston, 2001 WL 1568879 (N.D. Ill. Dec.10, 2001)

In litigation arising from delays in a municipal sewer project, defendant sought electronic production of email, computerized schedules and cost summaries which had already been produced in hard copy form.

The court found that defendant had failed to meet its burden of establishing that paper copies of the computer files were insufficient, and denied the motion. The court was not impressed by defendant's vague assertion that "the electronic version of McNally's schedules will better allow the City and its consultants to understand the reasons for the delays encountered by McNally on this project." 2001 WL 1568879, at *4. It further stated that its own research had uncovered "an apparent split of authority on whether a party is entitled to both hard-copy and electronic versions of computer files," citing Williams v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 665 F.2d 918 (9th Cir. 1982) and Anti-Monopoly v. Hasbro, 1995 WL 649934 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 3, 1995), and noted that neither party had cited or discussed those or any other cases. Id. In response to defendant's speculation that the hard-copies may be incomplete, the court ordered the plaintiff "to supplement the hard-copy versions of its computer files to ensure that it had produced all of the information contained in those files to [the city]." Id. at *5.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL

Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end

This blog/Web site is made available by the contributing lawyers or law firm publisher solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general legal principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. By using this blog/Web site, you understand that there is no attorney client relationship intended or formed between you and the blog/Web site publisher or any contributing lawyer. The blog/Web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

K&L Gates includes lawyers practicing out of more than 40 fully integrated offices located in North America, Europe, Asia, South America, and the Middle East, and represents numerous GLOBAL 500, FORTUNE 100, and FTSE 100 corporations, in addition to growth and middle market companies, entrepreneurs, capital market participants and public sector entities. For more information about K&L Gates or its locations and registrations, visit www.klgates.com.

Portions of this Web site may contain Attorney Advertising under the rules of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

e-Discovery Analysis & Technology group at K&L Gates, offering services related to ediscovery, review of electronic documents, electronic discovery and electronic evidence discovery.
K&L Gates LLP
925 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2900, Seattle, Washington 98104-1158
p. 206.623.7580, f. 206.623.7022