Key Insight: Texas Supreme Court denied defendant’s request for mandamus relief, finding that trial court did not abuse discretion in ordering production of backup tapes since defendant failed to support its objections as required by Tex. R. Civ. P. 193.4(a)
Nature of Case: Class action against web host alleging contract breach, negligence and violation of Deceptive Trade Practices Act
Electronic Data Involved: Backup tapes
Key Insight: Court ordered defendant to respond to document requests by searching its electronic storage devices and electronic data compilations; plaintiff convinced court that defendant may not have satisfied its discovery obligations by showing that responsive Diebold documents and emails had been obtained from other sources, but had yet to be produced by Diebold itself
Nature of Case: Insurance coverage
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Forwarding or copying email or other documents that are prepared by non-lawyers for business purposes to a lawyer does not transform such email or documents into work product
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: After case was removed to federal court, defendant obtained order vacating state court’s entry of ex parte preservation order requiring defendant to “suspend all routine destruction of documents, including but not limited to, recycling back-up tapes, automated deletion of e-mail, and reformatting hard drives,” compliance with which defendant estimated to cost $50,000/month
Nature of Case: Product liability
Electronic Data Involved: Documents and information in paper or electronic format
Key Insight: Emails exchanged between a narrow group of plaintiff corporate business’s non-attorney employees were protected from discovery by attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine; further, statements on plaintiff’s web site waived work product protection for affidavits described therein, but did not waive work product protection with respect to plaintiff’s recorded conversation with competitor’s former employees and email exchanges with them
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Finding no bad faith in defendant’s failure to preserve email since defendants simply persevered in their normal document retention practices, court nonetheless ruled that plaintiff would be allowed to prove the facts reflecting the non-retention of email and argue to the trier of fact that this destruction of evidence, in addition to other proof offered at trial, warranted certain inferences
Nature of Case: Trademark infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Applying Zubulake balancing test, court ordered parties to share equally the cost of extracting source code from defendant’s database; however, defendant solely to bear cost of copying source code for production once it is extracted
Nature of Case: Infringement action
Electronic Data Involved: Source code
Key Insight: Court entered preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from, among other things, deleting, destroying or altering any document, email or computer drive containing any ProPath or ProPath related information, and required defendants to segregate said items into a confidential file not to be used in their business
Nature of Case: Contract breach, misappropriation of confidential information, breach of fiduciary duty
Electronic Data Involved: Email and other electronic files
Key Insight: Defense counsel’s failure to produce computer records and to retain all drafts of settlement documents reflected lack of diligence rather than intentional effort to abuse discovery process; testimony of witness barred and $500 awarded as sanctions
Nature of Case: Sexual harassment
Electronic Data Involved: Computer records
Key Insight: Plaintiff’s motion to modify scheduling order to allow additional electronic discovery (production of all source code and image copies of all hard drives with access to a server from which a particular disk was copied) denied because plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable diligence — it had possession of the disputed disk for over nine months before it examined the disk and appreciated its significance
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Source code, image copies of hard drives
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.