Archive - February 2017

1
Organik Kimya v. ITC (Fed. Cir., 2017)
2
Alston v. Park Pleasant (3rd Circuit, 2017)
3
“Troubling” Activity with No Proof of Spoliation Insufficient to Warrant Sanctions
4
Creighton v. City of New York (Southern District New York, 2017)
5
Shawe v. Elting (Delaware, 2017)
6
Harleysville Insurance Co. v. Holding Funeral Home, No. 1:15cv00057 (W.D .Va. Feb. 9, 2017)
7
Lindsey v. Butterfield Health Care II, Inc (Ill. App. , 2017)
8
Davine v. Golub Corp. (Massachusetts District, 2017)
9
Charles v. City of New York (E.D. N.Y., 2017)
10
Simon v. Northwestern Univ., No. 1:150CV01433, 2017 WL 467677 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 3, 2017)

Organik Kimya v. ITC (Fed. Cir., 2017)

Key Insight: whether an order of default judgment amounts to abuse of discretion given finding of bad faith

Nature of Case: patent infringement / misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records

Keywords: spoliation, overwriting, internal clock, laptop, forensic investigation, intent, bad faith, prejudice, ability to control, litigation hold notice, default judgment, adverse inference, deterrence

View Case Opinion

Alston v. Park Pleasant (3rd Circuit, 2017)

Key Insight: No spoliation because no bad faith found when party did not retain records after selling assets (including computers)

Nature of Case: workplace discrimination, disability rights

Electronic Data Involved: unspecified electronic records

Keywords: Rule 37(e) ignored,

View Case Opinion

“Troubling” Activity with No Proof of Spoliation Insufficient to Warrant Sanctions

HCC Ins. Holdings, Inc. v. Flowers, No. 1:15-cv-3262-WSD, 2017 WL 393732 (N.D. Ga. Jan. 30, 2017)

In this case, the court declined to impose spoliation sanctions, despite Defendant and her husband’s “troubling” behavior, where Plaintiff failed to “present evidence to cast significant doubt” on the explanations for the at-issue behavior and failed to establish that the at-issue information—namely Plaintiff’s trade secrets and confidential information—had ever been “resident” on Defendant’s personal computer or otherwise in her control.

Read More

Shawe v. Elting (Delaware, 2017)

Key Insight: Even if documents are recovered from deletion, sanctions may still be proper, sanctions are proper when failing to adhere to litigation holds, sanctions based on perjury are not criminal charges of perjury, extreme bad-faith litigation allows for cost shifting of attorney’s fees

Nature of Case: Litigation misconduct

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic files

Keywords: 7 million, sanctions, unusually deplorable, perjury, bizarre, rat droppings

Identified State Rule(s): “American Rule”

View Case Opinion

Harleysville Insurance Co. v. Holding Funeral Home, No. 1:15cv00057 (W.D .Va. Feb. 9, 2017)

Key Insight: Waiver of privilege for documents inadvertently posted to publicly accessible Box.com location

Nature of Case: insurance coverage litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Box.com uploads

Keywords: Box.com, privilege waiver, publicly accessible, account permissions, file sharing

Identified State Rule(s): Va. Sup. Ct. R. 4.1(b)(6)(ii)

Identified Federal Rule(s): FRE 502(b)

View Case Opinion

Davine v. Golub Corp. (Massachusetts District, 2017)

Key Insight: Predictive coding models are legitimate, and document review can stop when the burden outweighs the benefits.

Nature of Case: wage and hour class action

Electronic Data Involved: archived email

Keywords: privilege log, predictive coding,

View Case Opinion

Charles v. City of New York (E.D. N.Y., 2017)

Key Insight: Court ruled that it could not be inferred from mere negligence that the recording would be favorable to defendants. Other sources of information/discovery were available as well. An application of Rule 37(e) would make no difference (the rule was not cited).

Nature of Case: Civil rights

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted cell phone video

Keywords: spoliation, sanctions, adverse inference

View Case Opinion

Simon v. Northwestern Univ., No. 1:150CV01433, 2017 WL 467677 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 3, 2017)

Key Insight: Compelling ESI prematurely is not needed if the records will be preserved throughout litigation

Nature of Case: malicious prosecution

Electronic Data Involved: emails, documents

Keywords: Scope of ESI search terms, willingness to produce

View Case Opinion

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.