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)
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
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
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
Key Insight: Where defendant voluntarily divulged a privileged email communication at unemployment hearing and in response to discovery request, defendant waived any privilege with respect to the communication and to testimony and documents regarding the same subject matter; trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion for return of the communication and for protective order, and in denying plaintiff’s motion to compel
Nature of Case: Wrongful discharge
Electronic Data Involved: Email
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
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
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
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
Key Insight: Defendant ordered to provide a complete and full response to interrogatory seeking information about Hospital Authority’s computer and email systems; defendant’s “very brief and general response” was insufficient
Nature of Case: Former employee alleged violations of free speech, due process and gender discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: Information re computer and email systems
Copyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.