eDiscovery Import – Page 254 – Electronic Discovery Law

ABC Health Servs., Inc. v. IBM Corp., 158 F.R.D. 180 (S.D. Ga. 1994)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff?s motion to dismiss IBM’s counterclaims as sanction for deletion of computer files, since erasure was done before suit was filed and did not amount to willful or bad faith disregard of discovery order or discovery request; court indicated that a jury instruction regarding destruction of documents may be an appropriate lesser sanction

Nature of Case: Breach of contract for development of software

Electronic Data Involved: Computer files containing both project-related documents and purely personal documents

Walker v. Cash Flow Consultants, Inc., 200 F.R.D. 613 (N.D. Ill. 2001)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: While granting without prejudice defendant’s motion to dismiss and denying without prejudice plaintiff’s motion to certify class, court found that plaintiff’s request for entry of a document preservation order was overbroad but not entirely unnecessary, and entered a more narrow document preservation order

Nature of Case: Class action alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

Electronic Data Involved: Computer information relating to defendant’s debt collection policies

Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 2004 WL 5326424 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Sept. 27, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court provided direction to parties for implementing injunction, ordering among other things: (1) defendant to obtain new computers of its choice and at its expense to replace all existing computers and servers; (2) defendant to choose which files would be transferred to new computers; (3) plaintiff?s expert to observe copying and transfer, and examine new computers to confirm they do not contain plaintiff?s data; (4) after transfer, defendant?s old computers to be stored and kept available for forensic discovery, the cost of which would be borne 75% by defendant and 25% by plaintiff, except that plaintiff?s expert fees to date to be divided evenly between plaintiff and defendant

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of proprietary information

Electronic Data Involved: 30 computers and 2 servers of defendant

GE Harris Ry. Elecs., LLC v. Westinghouse Air Brake Co., 2004 WL 5702740 (D. Del. Mar. 29, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court declined to impose terminating sanctions and instead ordered an adverse inference sanction against defendant for employee?s intentional spoliation of electronic evidence where the destruction was motivated by an intent to eliminate incriminating evidence but where the prejudice was minimal in light of plaintiff?s ability to obtain copies of the deleted evidence by other means

Nature of Case: Patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: ESI, emails

Edward D. Ioli Trust v. Avigilon Corp., No. 2:10-cv-605-JRG, 2012 WL 5830711 (E.D. Tex)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court found that local Patent Rule 3-4(a) requires production of source code and granted Plaintiff?s motion to compel

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Source Code

U.S. v. Siddiqui, 235 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2000)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: District court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that an email was adequately authenticated by, among other things, the presence of defendant?s email address and the context and content of the email and was ?within its discretion? to deny hearsay objections to the introduction of the email because it was both an admission by a party AND was not hearsay in the first place where it was admitted to show the correspondents?? ?relationship and custom of communicating by e-mail.?

Nature of Case: Fraud, false statements to a federal agency, and obstruction of a federal investigation

Electronic Data Involved: Email

United States v. First Data, 287 F. Supp. 2d 69 (D.D.C. 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Scheduling and case management order provides, inter alia, that document requests shall be responded to and documents produced within ten days after service, and that parties will produce documents in either hard copy form, or, in the case of electronic documents, in the native electronic format (or a mutually agreeable format)

Hagemeyer N. Am., Inc. v. Gateway Data Sci. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 594 (E.D. Wis. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Adopting Zubulake and McPeek approaches, court ordered defendant to restore a sampling of five backup tapes selected by the plaintiff; parties would thereafter be required to make additional submissions addressing whether the burden or expense of satisfying the entire request was proportionate to the likely benefit

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

McCabe v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 221 F.R.D. 423 (D.N.J. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Magistrate recommended that non-parties’ motion for attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in appearing for depositions and responding to subpoenas be denied, since non-parties failed to object to subpoenas or condition compliance on reimbursement, and an award of $58,000, without notice to plaintiffs, would be tantamount to severe prejudice

Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard copy documents

Network Computing Servs. Corp. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 223 F.R.D. 392 (D.S.C. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Concluding that plaintiff’s discovery abuse warranted sanctions, district court ruled that appropriate sanction would be to inform the jury about plaintiff’s misconduct, since monetary sanctions previously imposed had not deterred further misconduct and extreme sanction of dismissal was not warranted by the facts

Electronic Data Involved: Breach of distributorship agreement, fraud, unfair trade practices and related torts

Author - eDiscovery Import