Case Summaries – Page 419 – Electronic Discovery Law

Network Computing Servs. Corp. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 223 F.R.D. 392 (D.S.C. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Concluding that plaintiff’s discovery abuse warranted sanctions, district court ruled that appropriate sanction would be to inform the jury about plaintiff’s misconduct, since monetary sanctions previously imposed had not deterred further misconduct and extreme sanction of dismissal was not warranted by the facts

Electronic Data Involved: Breach of distributorship agreement, fraud, unfair trade practices and related torts

Bertsch v. Duemeland, 639 N.W.2d 455 (N.D. 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Plaintiff denied access to hard drives of computers acquired by defendant after alleged torts took place

Nature of Case: Tortious interference, misappropriation of trade secrets, defamation

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives (to locate email)

Cobell v. Norton, 206 F.R.D. 324 (D.D.C. 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Government’s motion for “protective order clarifying that it may produce email in response to discovery requests by producing from paper records of email messages rather than from backup tapes and may overwrite backup tapes in accordance with Departmental directives” denied as inappropriate given history of dispute; plaintiffs awarded attorneys’ fees and costs associated with motion

Nature of Case: Suit against the government alleging mismanagement of Indian trust funds

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

Deloach v. Philip Morris Co., 206 F.R.D. 568 (M.D.N.C. 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Where defendant withheld computerized data and defense expert subsequently used data in rebuttal report, court allowed plaintiffs the opportunity to respond to defendants’ rebuttal expert report, and ruled that defendants would not be allowed opportunity to reply to plaintiffs’ response to the withheld information

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized transaction data

Giardina v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2003 WL 1338826 (E.D. La. Mar. 14, 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Magistrate’s order granting plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery and awarding attorneys’ fees upheld; employer required to provide available data and also respond by stating the steps taken to obtain non-work related internet sites accessed during the dates requested, including detailed explanation of efforts to obtain information and reasons its efforts were not successful if it was unable to obtain the data to fully respond to interrogatory

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Information re all non-work related internet sites accessed on certain of employer’s computers during relevant period

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

Dec 01 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)

Dec 01 2004

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)

Dec 01 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)

Dec 01 2004

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)

Dec 01 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

Catagory:Case Summaries