Archive: May 2006

1
Plaintiff’s Willful and Bad Faith Spoliation of Evidence and “Hide the Ball” Tactics Warranted Default Judgment on Counterclaims
2
Morgan Stanley to Pay $15 Million Fine to Settle E-Discovery Charges
3
TRO Requires Defendants to Return Proprietary Materials and Computers to Former Employer, and Provide Affidavit Affirming Compliance and/or Detailing Any Disposal of Items
4
Lacking Adequate Information About Defendant’s IS Capabilities and Costs of Electronic Production, Court Orders Parties to Confer and Report Back
5
Following Mini-Conference, Advisory Committee Approves Proposed New FRE 502 for Publication
6
14th Annual Managing Electronic Records [MER] Conference

Plaintiff’s Willful and Bad Faith Spoliation of Evidence and “Hide the Ball” Tactics Warranted Default Judgment on Counterclaims

Krumwiede v. Brighton Assocs., L.L.C., 2006 WL 1308629 (N.D. Ill. May 8, 2006)

In this case, plaintiff sued his former employer for breach of his employee agreement, reimbursement of back pay, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and reformation of the employee agreement. On August 25, 2005, the former employer (“Brighton”) filed a counterclaim alleging that plaintiff went to work for a competitor, STI, and misappropriated a business opportunity with a prospective Brighton client (LifeScan Scotland, Ltd.). The counterclaim alleged: (1) breach of the non-compete provision of the employee agreement, (2) breach of the confidentiality provision, (3) tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, (4) violation of the Illinois Trade Secrets Act, and (5) breach of duty. Read More

Morgan Stanley to Pay $15 Million Fine to Settle E-Discovery Charges

From the New York Times:

“Wall Street powerhouse Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. has agreed to pay a $15 million civil fine to settle federal regulators’ charges that it repeatedly failed to provide tens of thousands of e-mails that they sought in major investigations over several years, federal regulators said Wednesday.

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced the settlement with Morgan Stanley, which neither admitted nor denied the allegations but did consent to a permanent injunction against future violations of the securities laws. In a civil lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington, the SEC also accused the investment firm of making “numerous misstatements” regarding the status of its efforts to preserve and produce the requested e-mails.”

Read the entire story here.

TRO Requires Defendants to Return Proprietary Materials and Computers to Former Employer, and Provide Affidavit Affirming Compliance and/or Detailing Any Disposal of Items

Cardinal Health 414, Inc. v. Rogers, 2006 WL 1207962 (E.D. La. May 3, 2006)

The court’s order enjoined the defendants and their employees or agents from soliciting any current employee of the plaintiff for employment. It also required the defendants to return to the plaintiff, through counsel, “any tangible property (including all copies, recordings and other reproductions), if any at all, in either of their possession owned or provided by Cardinal, which tangible property was not returned to Cardinal at the conclusion of their employment with Cardinal.” The property to be returned included: Read More

Lacking Adequate Information About Defendant’s IS Capabilities and Costs of Electronic Production, Court Orders Parties to Confer and Report Back

Thompson v. Jiffy Lube Int’l, Inc., 2006 WL 1174040 (D. Kan. May 1, 2006)

In this (uncertified) consumer class action, the court considered plaintiffs’ motion to compel the production of documents. Defendant contended that plaintiffs’ production requests exceeded the scope of class certification discovery, and were vague, overly broad and unduly burdensome. For example, defendant asserted that approximately 31 million vehicles were serviced annually at company-owned and franchised Jiffy Lube stores, and that plaintiffs’ request for all vehicle service records going back to January 1, 1997 was unduly burdensome and overly broad. Plaintiffs responded that defendant failed to carry its burden of showing “undue burden” and that the requested documents could be produced in electronic format at a minimal cost. Read More

Following Mini-Conference, Advisory Committee Approves Proposed New FRE 502 for Publication

On Monday, April 24, 2006, the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Evidence held a mini-conference on a proposed new rule concerning waiver of the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. The conference was held at Fordham Law School in New York City, and featured the following distinguished presenters: Read More

Copyright © 2018, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.