Key Insight: Answering question of whether inadvertent disclosure of privileged information to testifying expert resulted in waiver of privilege, court ?conclude[ed] that a claim of inadvertent waiver cannot be used to withhold information from opposing counsel once it has found its way into the expert?s hands ? however unintentional that may be.?
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Where nearly two months following notice of inadvertent production of privileged materials plaintiff undertook a review of its entire production and production process and thereafter attempted to recall an additional 55 inadvertently produced documents, the court acknowledged that plaintiff ?was perhaps not as diligent as defendant would have liked? in initiating its search, but denied the motion for a finding of waiver
Electronic Data Involved: Privileged materials
Key Insight: Court denied sanctions for defendants? alleged ?document dump? of a hard drive containing both responsive and non-responsive documents as maintained in the ordinary course of business where, upon plaintiffs? initial objection, defendants re-produced the hard drive with irrelevant documents segregated and with a tool allowing the hard drive to be word-searched and where, despite plaintiffs? alleged discovery of evidence reflecting defendants? purposeful efforts to obstruct discovery, plaintiffs waited 15 months to bring their motion and were thus ?simply too late?
Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive
Key Insight: Appellate court upheld ruling that copies of website attached to affidavit attempting to establish contacts sufficient for personal jurisdiction were not authenticated and therefore inadmissible where affiant asserted that the pages were copies of defendant?s website but failed to present evidence showing the website was created by defendant or that the statements in the printouts were made by persons authorized to speak on defendant?s behalf; court noted that ?self-authenticating? provisions in Evidence Code ?operates to establish only that a computer?s print function has worked properly. The presumption does not operate to establish the accuracy of the printed information.?
Nature of Case: Claims arising from death of patient while in nursing facility
Electronic Data Involved: Printed pages from website
Key Insight: Where third-party (and former defendant) signed stipulation to preserve and produce ESI as if still a party to the litigation and later sought reimbursement for the review and production of data in a particular database, court ordered a database be created comprised of the four custodians at issue, that plaintiff pay $4085 to the vendor as a ?start-up fee? (pursuant to their agreement to do so), and that plaintiff and third-party split the remaining costs of creating the database, but ordered third-party to bear the costs of its own review prior to production
Nature of Case: Antitrist litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Database
Key Insight: Where MySpace messages were admitted into evidence upon the testimony of the recipient which established that the messages were sent by someone with access to the alleged sender?s MySpace page but that did not establish the identity of the person who actually sent the communications, appellate court ruled the messages were admitted in error, but that the error did not create a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice; conviction was affirmed
Nature of Case: Appeal of murder conviction
Electronic Data Involved: MySpace messages
Key Insight: Defendant?s motion for a protective order precluding compliance with plaintiff?s? subpoena duces tecum was denied where defendant failed to establish the irrelevance of the data sought and failed to establish the unduly burdensome nature of producing the information requested or to assert that the information was not reasonably accessible and where the court determined that an existing protective order was sufficient to protect any confidential information produced
Nature of Case: Antitrust litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Emails, ESI, hard copy
Key Insight: District court upheld sanction precluding defendant from presenting evidence of non-discriminatory reasons for non-promotion upon a prima facie showing of disparate treatment where defendant failed to conduct a reasonable search for responsive paper documents, despite a court order to do so, including providing ?ambiguous and deficient? search instructions to employees; failing to follow up when employees failed to uncover responsive information; and failing to credibly explain defendant?s search efforts, and where the Magistrate Judge properly concluded the sanction was proportional to the offense(s)
Nature of Case: Putative class action for discriminatory non-promotion
Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy
Key Insight: Court found email had not been properly authenticated where the email was not self authenticating and where the email was a purely internal communication between employees of a third party company and thus could not be authenticated by the defense witness who was not an employee of that company, was not listed as a recipient of the email, and testified that he had never seen the document before
Nature of Case: Adversarial action in Bankruptcy
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Where defendant admitted that information regarding potential class members had been deleted pursuant to its regular information management practice and indicated that some (but not all) information could be retrieved from backup tapes, the court acknowledged defendant?s duty to preserve but reasoned the culpability for such deletions was ?somewhat lessened? because no one had requested that defendant alter is retention policies and because the deletions occurred ?pursuant to the regular operation? of those policies and determined that no conclusions could be reached on the record provided but that ?the court may consider imposing a remedy in any findings regarding the fairness of settlement?
Nature of Case: Class action challenging certain fees assessed on American Express-issued gift cards
Electronic Data Involved: Customer-identifying information
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.