Catagory:Case Summaries

1
Markham v. Nat’l States Ins. Co., 2004 WL 3019308 (W.D. Okla. Jan. 8, 2004)
2
Drnek v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 2004 WL 1098919 (D. Ariz. May 4, 2004)
3
McCabe v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 221 F.R.D. 423 (D.N.J. 2004)
4
Bertsch v. Duemeland, 639 N.W.2d 455 (N.D. 2002)
5
Cobell v. Norton, 206 F.R.D. 324 (D.D.C. 2002)
6
Deloach v. Philip Morris Co., 206 F.R.D. 568 (M.D.N.C. 2002)
7
Giardina v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2003 WL 1338826 (E.D. La. Mar. 14, 2003)
8
Hollingsworth v. Time Warner Cable, 812 N.E.2d 976 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
9
Lakewood Eng’g & Mfg. Co. v. Lasko Prods., Inc., 2003 WL 1220254 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 14, 2003)
10
Med. Billing Consultants, Inc. v. Intelligent Med. Objects, Inc., 2003 WL 1809465 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 4, 2003)

Markham v. Nat’l States Ins. Co., 2004 WL 3019308 (W.D. Okla. Jan. 8, 2004)

Key Insight: After jury awarded plaintiffs $225,000 in compensatory and punitive damages, court considered as a post-judgment matter the issue of whether to impose sanctions against defendant for discovery abuse, allowing parties to conduct further discovery on the impact of defendant’s noncompliance and scheduling an evidentiary hearing on the issue

Nature of Case: Heirs of insured sued insurance company for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, false representation and deceit

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized claims information

Drnek v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 2004 WL 1098919 (D. Ariz. May 4, 2004)

Key Insight: Sanctions not warranted where plaintiffs made ?tenuous allegation? without any specific evidentiary support that defendants had implemented a new email document retention policy after litigation was commenced and that potentially relative emails may have been destroyed pursuant to the policy

Nature of Case: Claimed violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities and Exchange Acts

Electronic Data Involved: Email

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

Cobell v. Norton, 206 F.R.D. 324 (D.D.C. 2002)

Key Insight: Government’s motion for “protective order clarifying that it may produce email in response to discovery requests by producing from paper records of email messages rather than from backup tapes and may overwrite backup tapes in accordance with Departmental directives” denied as inappropriate given history of dispute; plaintiffs awarded attorneys’ fees and costs associated with motion

Nature of Case: Suit against the government alleging mismanagement of Indian trust funds

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

Deloach v. Philip Morris Co., 206 F.R.D. 568 (M.D.N.C. 2002)

Key Insight: Where defendant withheld computerized data and defense expert subsequently used data in rebuttal report, court allowed plaintiffs the opportunity to respond to defendants’ rebuttal expert report, and ruled that defendants would not be allowed opportunity to reply to plaintiffs’ response to the withheld information

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized transaction data

Giardina v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2003 WL 1338826 (E.D. La. Mar. 14, 2003)

Key Insight: Magistrate’s order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and awarding attorneys’ fees upheld; employer required to provide available data and also respond by stating the steps taken to obtain non-work related internet sites accessed during the dates requested, including detailed explanation of efforts to obtain information and reasons its efforts were not successful if it was unable to obtain the data to fully respond to interrogatory

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Information re all non-work related internet sites accessed on certain of employer’s computers during relevant period

Hollingsworth v. Time Warner Cable, 812 N.E.2d 976 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendant voluntarily divulged a privileged email communication at unemployment hearing and in response to discovery request, defendant waived any privilege with respect to the communication and to testimony and documents regarding the same subject matter; trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion for return of the communication and for protective order, and in denying plaintiff’s motion to compel

Nature of Case: Wrongful discharge

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Lakewood Eng’g & Mfg. Co. v. Lasko Prods., Inc., 2003 WL 1220254 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 14, 2003)

Key Insight: Although plaintiff’s production of relevant email and other documents in electronic form after the close of discovery demonstrated lack of good faith effort to produce all requested discovery in timely manner, sanctions were not warranted

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email and other documents in electronic form

Med. Billing Consultants, Inc. v. Intelligent Med. Objects, Inc., 2003 WL 1809465 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 4, 2003)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants to allow experts to perform physical inspection of their computer equipment and files, since full disclosure of email had been provided by defendants and inspection was likely to be unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Defendant’s computer equipment and files

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.