Catagory:Case Summaries

1
Glover v. Standard Fed. Bank, 2001 WL 34635710 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2001)
2
Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)
3
Landmark Legal Found. v. EPA, 272 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D.D.C. 2003)
4
Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. v. Michelson, 2004 WL 2905399 (W.D. Tenn. May 3, 2004)
5
In re Pharmatrak, Inc. Privacy Litig., 292 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D. Mass. 2003)
6
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
7
S. Diagnostic Assoc. v. Bencosme, 833 So.2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
8
Times Publ’g Co. v. City of Clearwater, 830 So.2d 844 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
9
United States v. Sungard Data Sys., 173 F. Supp. 2d 20 (D.D.C. 2001)
10
Xpedior Creditor Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc., 2003 WL 22283835 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2003)

Glover v. Standard Fed. Bank, 2001 WL 34635710 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2001)

Key Insight: Where evidence showed there was no feasible and economic electronic means by which certain data could be produced, court ruled that, to the extent defendants intended to introduce evidence related to such data at trial, defendants would be required to produce all such evidence, documentary, electronic or otherwise, upon which they intend to rely

Nature of Case: Class action

Electronic Data Involved: Information regarding damages, offsets and class member eligibility

Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)

Key Insight: In light of defendant’s previous attempt to delete incriminating email and documents from his company laptop, court entered order requiring all parties to preserve and protect evidence

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of corporate opportunity and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents and mail

Landmark Legal Found. v. EPA, 272 F. Supp. 2d 70 (D.D.C. 2003)

Key Insight: EPA violated preliminary injunction that prohibited destruction of potentially responsive documents by reformatting hard drives and erasing or overwriting backup tapes containing potentially responsive email; EPA held in civil contempt and ordered to pay plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred as a result of EPA’s contumacious conduct

Nature of Case: FOIA action

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives and email stored on backup tapes

Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc. v. Michelson, 2004 WL 2905399 (W.D. Tenn. May 3, 2004)

Key Insight: Declining to determine whether its May 13, 2003 order contemplated the production of deleted files, court overruled defendant’s objections to special master’s order denying request for production of deleted files, finding that defendant’s request was untimely and that “the process of recovering deleted files at this late stage of litigation would be an undue burden on Medtronic and is based, the court’s opinion, on mere speculation that relevant deleted files could be recovered”

Nature of Case: Intellectual property litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted files

In re Pharmatrak, Inc. Privacy Litig., 292 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D. Mass. 2003)

Key Insight: Granting summary judgment for defendants, court noted that pursuant to an earlier order, plaintiffs’ expert was given unrestricted access to the hard drives of Pharmatrak’s computer servers over one-month period, and stated that plaintiffs characterization of its expert’s search of Pharmatrak’s computer servers as a “partial” inspection was unsupported by the record and failed to raise an issue of fact

Nature of Case: Class action alleging that defendants secretly intercepted and accessed plaintiffs’ personal information and browsing habits through unlawful use of cookies and other devices

Electronic Data Involved: Inspection of computer servers

Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)

Key Insight: Based on in camera review, court granted defendant’s motion to compel based on the crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered production of other documents on same subject matter and further ruled that discovery would be allowed regarding documents produced and on the issue of sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email, backup tapes

S. Diagnostic Assoc. v. Bencosme, 833 So.2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Key Insight: Appellate court granted writ and quashed trial court’s order granting party’s motion for leave to inspect non-party’s computer system; remanded with directions to trial court to craft a narrowly-tailored order that sets parameters and limitations on the inspection

Nature of Case: Insurance bad faith

Electronic Data Involved: Computer system; records of payments to physicians

Times Publ’g Co. v. City of Clearwater, 830 So.2d 844 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Key Insight: Email stored in government computers does not automatically become public records by virtue of that storage; private or personal email fell outside the statutory definition of “public records”

Nature of Case: Newspaper sued city to release as public record all email sent from or received by two city employees

Electronic Data Involved: Email

United States v. Sungard Data Sys., 173 F. Supp. 2d 20 (D.D.C. 2001)

Key Insight: Motion to preclude in-house counsel from having access to confidential information produced by competitors denied; court established detailed protective order for handling of confidential information

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents

Xpedior Creditor Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc., 2003 WL 22283835 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2003)

Key Insight: Motion for protective order requiring plaintiff to share the cost of restoring computer files denied; Zubulake judge applied Zubulake factors and concluded that cost-shifting was not appropriate

Nature of Case: Breach of contract class action

Electronic Data Involved: Computer files housed on decommissioned systems

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