Category: Case Summaries

1
Harvey v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2004 WL 3142228 (W.D. Tenn. Aug. 23, 2004)
2
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hodges, 855 So.2d 636 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
3
Compuware Corp. v. Moody’s Investors Servs., Inc., 2004 WL 2931401 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2004)
4
Hahn v. Minn. Beef Ind., 2002 WL 32667146 (D. Minn. Mar. 8, 2002)
5
Long Term Capital Holdings v. United States, 2003 WL 21518555 (D. Conn. May 15, 2003)
6
Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 259 F. Supp. 2d 561 (N.D. Tex. 2003)
7
Stevenson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 354 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2004)
8
Weaver v. Zenimax Media, Inc., 2004 WL 2755852 (Md. Cir. Ct. Sept. 3, 2004)
9
Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 348 F.Supp.2d 332 (D.N.J. 2004) (“Mosaid IV”)
10
Bovis Lend Lease, LMB, Inc. v. Seasons Contracting Corp., 2002 WL 31729693 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2002)

Harvey v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2004 WL 3142228 (W.D. Tenn. Aug. 23, 2004)

Key Insight: Court ordered defendant to supplement interrogatory response where deposition testimony showed that some of the information sought in the interrogatory could be obtained from a simple computer operation

Nature of Case: Insured alleged that insurer’s denial of claim violated 42 U.S.C. ? 1981

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized claim file information

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hodges, 855 So.2d 636 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

Key Insight: Trial court properly ordered insurer to answer victim’s interrogatories despite claimed burden; court remarked: “[I]n the three years following the issuance of Boecher, Allstate still has not implemented a computer program or system for keeping track of the information. In fact, Allstate used two of the very same affidavits it used in Boecher to explain that its computer systems did not have the information requested readily accessible. In this day of the computer age, and in light of the Boecher court’s serious emphasis on the need for the very type of information requested, Allstate may want to reconsider adapting its computer system to provide easier access to the requested information.”

Nature of Case: Personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: Information regarding insurer’s relationship with and payments to medical groups where its experts worked as physicians

Compuware Corp. v. Moody’s Investors Servs., Inc., 2004 WL 2931401 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 15, 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied motion to compel as to particular request for production where plaintiff offered to provide defendant a set of portable computer disks (at a cost of $40,000) that contained all the documents that plaintiff produced in separate litigation; since defendant had specifically requested these documents, court would not require plaintiff to cull documents that were responsive to another (more narrow) request

Nature of Case: Dispute over defendant’s credit rating of plaintiff

Electronic Data Involved: Computer disks

Hahn v. Minn. Beef Ind., 2002 WL 32667146 (D. Minn. Mar. 8, 2002)

Key Insight: Where, after months of discovery disputes, reports upon which defendant urged plaintiff to rely in lieu of full database turned out to be inaccurate, court denied plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment for discovery abuse and instead postponed trial so that defendant could produce accurate information; however, court imposed monetary sanctions against defendant representing plaintiff’s legal and expert fees for time spent working with inaccurate data

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Database, reports, electronic data

Long Term Capital Holdings v. United States, 2003 WL 21518555 (D. Conn. May 15, 2003)

Key Insight: Court denied government’s motion to compel production of opposing party’s rebuttal expert’s proprietary database since rebuttal expert report complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) and no further disclosures were warranted

Nature of Case: Taxpayer petition for readjustment

Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary database maintained by taxpayer’s rebuttal expert

Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 259 F. Supp. 2d 561 (N.D. Tex. 2003)

Key Insight: Court entered preservation order requiring preservation of all extant backups or images of all servers or personal computers containing disputed software or email; court denied motion to compel imaging of all media potentially containing software or electronic evidence relevant to the claims in the suit, and all images of defendants’ computer storage facilities, drives and servers taken to date, as substantially overbroad

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Backups and images of servers, software and email

Stevenson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 354 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2004)

Key Insight: Adverse inference jury instruction against defendant for its prelitigation destruction of tape-recorded voice radio communications between train crew and dispatchers on date of collision was proper, but refusal to permit testimony offered by defendant to rebut the adverse inference was abuse of discretion

Nature of Case: Negligence

Electronic Data Involved: Tape-recorded voice radio communications

Weaver v. Zenimax Media, Inc., 2004 WL 2755852 (Md. Cir. Ct. Sept. 3, 2004)

Key Insight: Exercising its inherent authority to safeguard the integrity of its judicial process, court granted defendants’ motion for sanctions and dismissed the complaint due to plaintiff’s discovery abuses and “civil vigilantism” which began during the course of his employment and prior to filing suit

Nature of Case: Wrongful discharge

Electronic Data Involved: Illicit incursions into the offices, computers, and email accounts of executives of defendant

Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 348 F.Supp.2d 332 (D.N.J. 2004) (“Mosaid IV”)

Key Insight: Finding defendant’s actions went “far beyond mere negligence, demonstrating knowing and intentional conduct that led to the nonproduction of all technical e-mails,” district court affirmed the spoliation inference jury instruction and monetary sanctions imposed by magistrate

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Bovis Lend Lease, LMB, Inc. v. Seasons Contracting Corp., 2002 WL 31729693 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2002)

Key Insight: Various emails among claims handlers, supervisors, in-house counsel and outside counsel were protected from discovery by either attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or both; however, voluntary production of certain emails waived protections; inadvertent disclosure may waive protections if reasonable precautions were not taken to guard against inadvertent disclosure

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.