Catagory:Case Summaries

1
In re John Doe Proceeding, 680 N.W.2d 792 (Wis. 2004)
2
Long Term Capital Holdings v. United States, 2003 WL 21518555 (D. Conn. May 15, 2003)
3
Munshani v. Signal Lake Venture Fund II, LP, 805 N.E.2d 998 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004)
4
Positive Software Solutions, Inc. v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 259 F. Supp. 2d 561 (N.D. Tex. 2003)
5
Santiago v. Miles, 121 F.R.D. 636 (W.D.N.Y. 1988)
6
Stevenson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 354 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2004)
7
Uncle Henry’s Inc. v. Plaut Consulting, Inc., 2002 WL 31833139 (D. Me. Dec. 17, 2002)
8
Weaver v. Zenimax Media, Inc., 2004 WL 2755852 (Md. Cir. Ct. Sept. 3, 2004)
9
Peter Rosenbaum Photography Corp. v. Otto Doosan Mail Order Ltd., 2004 WL 2973822 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 30, 2004)
10
Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 348 F.Supp.2d 332 (D.N.J. 2004) (“Mosaid IV”)

In re John Doe Proceeding, 680 N.W.2d 792 (Wis. 2004)

Key Insight: Supreme Court of Wisconsin quashed as overbroad a “John Doe” subpoena seeking all digital computer information or data maintained by the legislature’s technology services bureau, stored by or on behalf of certain named elected officials, any person who had ever been employed in their offices, as well as anyone who had ever been employed in the legislative caucuses for both parties or, in the alternative, the backup tapes from December 15, 2001, for the entire legislative branch of government

Nature of Case: Criminal investigation relating to political caucuses and actions of certain legislators

Electronic Data Involved: All digital computer information or data, and backup tapes for the entire legislative branch of government

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

Munshani v. Signal Lake Venture Fund II, LP, 805 N.E.2d 998 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004)

Key Insight: Dismissal of complaint was appropriate sanction for fraud on the court consisting of plaintiff’s forging email, swearing to its authenticity, and continuing to insist on its authenticity while independent computer expert investigated the matter and ultimately concluded the email was fabricated; plaintiff ordered to pay costs and fees of expert and defendants’ attorney’s fees and costs related to discovery of the fraud

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Forged email

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

Santiago v. Miles, 121 F.R.D. 636 (W.D.N.Y. 1988)

Key Insight: Motion to compel production of computer printouts denied as to those constituting work product, granted as to those that were not prepared in anticipation of litigation

Nature of Case: Inmates sued for intentional discrimination in assignment of housing, programs, and administration of discipline

Electronic Data Involved: Computer printouts showing analysis of work locations and ethnicity of inmates

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

Uncle Henry’s Inc. v. Plaut Consulting, Inc., 2002 WL 31833139 (D. Me. Dec. 17, 2002)

Key Insight: Court rejected plaintiff’s motion to reconsider recommended decision on summary judgment and motion to supplement the record with additional electronic materials (including email) obtained from belatedly produced zip disk, since plaintiff failed to seek a continuance under Rule 56(f) and proffer came two months after receipt of electronic media and was therefore tardy

Nature of Case: Contract dispute

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents and email stored on “zip” disk

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

Peter Rosenbaum Photography Corp. v. Otto Doosan Mail Order Ltd., 2004 WL 2973822 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 30, 2004)

Key Insight: Court ordered nonparty to comply with subpoenas seeking electronic records, imposing monetary sanctions for nonparty’s unsupported argument that bankruptcy court’s automatic stay prevented it from having to comply with the subpoenas and ordering nonparty and plaintiff to meet and confer on means for compliance

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records, including email

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

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