Key Insight: Grand jury subpoena demanding production of all computer hard drives and disks of specified individuals (as opposed to specified categories of information) quashed because it was unreasonably broad
Nature of Case: Grand jury proceedings
Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives and floppy diskettes
Key Insight: Discovery deadline extended and defendant ordered to “use every practicable means” to identify requested claims files; if defendant truly cannot segregate the claim files, defendant would be directed to make available a representative with requisite knowledge and skill to assist plaintiff’s representative in reviewing and identifying as promptly as possible each unsegregated file which met plaintiff’s criteria
Nature of Case: ERISA action to recover death benefits under employee benefit plan
Electronic Data Involved: Database re insurance claims
Key Insight: Noting differences between federal law and New York law regarding cost-shifting in discovery, court stated it did not have sufficient information about the costs associated with the requested discovery, but concluded that until plaintiffs indicated a willingness to pay for the requested electronic discovery (whatever its cost), court would not order its production
Nature of Case: Claims based on breach of contract and for an accounting
Electronic Data Involved: Computer data
Key Insight: Plaintiff’s motion to compel copy of “list files” screen, which listed each document created by name or number, as well as the size of the document, the date on which it was created and the date on which it was last edited, granted where plaintiff demonstrated need to determine whether key documents were back-dated
Nature of Case: Wrongful termination (discrimination based on race/national origin)
Electronic Data Involved: Copy of “list files” screen showing details of files on computer of individual defendant
Key Insight: Court granted motion to compel access to database constituting fact work product, where requesting party demonstrated (1) substantial need for the information and (2) undue hardship were it required to compile a similar database from scratch; however, requesting party would have to contribute its fair share toward the expenses incurred in compiling the database
Nature of Case: Class action for civil rights violations
Electronic Data Involved: Database compiled at direction of plaintiffs’ attorneys
Key Insight: District judge upheld magistrate’s decision
Nature of Case: Concert promoters sued booking agencies and other promoters for discriminatory and anti-competitive practices
Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes and hard drives
Key Insight: Court denied successful defendant’s petition for costs associated with its outside vendor’s compilation, search and production of 50,000 emails on grounds that such costs were not listed as recoverable costs in 28 USC ? 1920
Nature of Case: Petition for attorneys’ fees and non-taxable costs under fee-shifting provision of ERISA
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Requiring insurer to create programs to retrieve and put in usable form information from its databases at its own expense, court stated: “[A] party cannot avoid discovery when its own recordkeeping system makes discovery burdensome. If a party chooses to store information in a manner that tends to conceal rather than reveal, that party bears the burden of putting the information in a format useable by others.” However, court did order that request for computer-generated reports be narrowed.
Nature of Case: Minority homeowners brought civil rights action alleging that insurer engaged in redlining to avoid minority neighborhoods
Electronic Data Involved: Insurer’s databases and computer-generated reports
Key Insight: District court upheld magistrate’s order requiring defendants to produce all responsive electronic information in native format
Nature of Case: Securities class action
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Order compelling defendant surgeon to produce his surgical database, to include information related to all the cholecystectomy procedures defendant had ever performed (with the patient names redacted) was abuse of discretion; matter remanded with directions that the court examine the database contents in camera to determine relevance and privilege issues
Nature of Case: Medical malpractice
Electronic Data Involved: Surgical database maintained by defendant surgeon
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.