Archive: August 4, 2006

1
Defendant’s Document Retention Policy “Clearly Relevant” and Must Be Produced
2
Court Awards Prevailing Party $4.6 Million in Costs for Litigation Database Creation
3
Spoliation Inference Further Supports Court’s Finding that Defendant Infringed Motion Picture Copyrights
4
Fourth Annual Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey Released

Defendant’s Document Retention Policy “Clearly Relevant” and Must Be Produced

Petersen v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 2006 WL 2054365 (C.D. Ill. July 21, 2006)

In this opinion, the magistrate judge overruled defendant’s objections to certain discovery requests, reminding the parties: “Remember, we are talking discovery, not admissibility at trial.” One of the disputed requests for production sought defendant’s document retention policy:
Read More

Court Awards Prevailing Party $4.6 Million in Costs for Litigation Database Creation

Lockheed Martin Idaho Techs. Co. v. Lockheed Martin Advanced Envtl. Sys., Inc., 2006 WL 2095876 (D. Idaho July 27, 2006)

In this diversity case, the federal district court awarded the prevailing party its costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4) in three areas: (1) $4.6 million in costs for creating a litigation database; (2) $600,000 in costs for trial evidence presentation; and (3) $200,000 in costs for copies.

The court evaluated the request as follows:

Turning to the first category, the litigation database was necessary due to the extreme complexity of this case and the millions of documents that had to be organized. While the creation of the database is expensive, it is not unreasonably so, and it saved immense time for counsel who otherwise would have to sift through the documents by hand. Given these circumstances, the Court finds that these costs are recoverable under § 1920(4).

With regard to the trial evidence presentation costs, the Court required counsel to put the trial evidence in electronic format. It was important that the evidence presentation be efficient and of high quality. The Court cannot find these costs unreasonable. The Court will likewise approve the third category, the coping costs.

Spoliation Inference Further Supports Court’s Finding that Defendant Infringed Motion Picture Copyrights

Paramount Pictures Corp. v. Davis, 2006 WL 2092581 (E.D. Pa. July 26, 2006)

In an earlier opinion (Paramount Pictures Corp. v. Davis, 234 F.R.D. 102 (E.D. Pa. 2005), summarized here), the court denied summary judgment but concluded that an adverse inference sanction was warranted based upon defendant’s spoliation of evidence. In this opinion, the court sets out its findings of fact and conclusions of law from the subsequent bench trial, and decides the case in favor of Paramount.

Read More

Fourth Annual Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey Released

From George Socha and Thomas Gelbmann’s August 2 story in Law Technology News: "Results are in for the fourth annual Socha-Gelbmann Electronic Discovery Survey, and here are highlights of the report. In general, spending continues to grow, although with changing processes and tightening prices some providers are beginning to feel the pinch.

Consolidation continues as well, with larger electronic-data-discovery providers buying smaller ones, and companies from outside the market looking for opportunities to enter what they see as a lucrative area."

Read the highlights here or visit http://www.sochaconsulting.com/2006survey.htm for more detail.

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