Catagory:Case Summaries

1
Polito v. AOL Time Warner, Inc., 2004 WL 3768897 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Jan. 28, 2004)
2
Pamlab, L.L.C. v. Rite Aid Corp., 2004 WL 2358106 (E.D. La. Oct. 13, 2004)
3
Federal Court Issues Opinion On E-Discovery Sanctions and Evidence Preservation
4
Fero v. Excellus Health Plan, Inc., No. 6:15-cv-06569-EAW (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2018)

Polito v. AOL Time Warner, Inc., 2004 WL 3768897 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Jan. 28, 2004)

Key Insight: Court ordered AOL to reveal the identities of its anonymous subscribers who had transmitted offensive emails and instant messages where plaintiff had established that: (1) she had a prima facie basis for asserting criminal or civil liability against the anonymous authors; (2) the identifying information was relevant to her claims and necessary to obtain redress; (3) she was seeking the information in good faith and not for an improper purpose; and (4) she was unable to obtain the identifying information by alternative means

Nature of Case: Individual sued ISP seeking disclosure of identities of subscribers who sent her offensive email and instant messages

Electronic Data Involved: Identities of subscribers

Pamlab, L.L.C. v. Rite Aid Corp., 2004 WL 2358106 (E.D. La. Oct. 13, 2004)

Key Insight: Court ruled that plaintiff should determine, either informally or during a corporate deposition of defendant, what information responsive to interrogatory could be retrieved from defendant?s computer system and what could only be retrieved manually; to the extent the information could only be retrieved manually, parties were ordered to attempt to agree on a sampling process

Electronic Data Involved: Computer databases

Federal Court Issues Opinion On E-Discovery Sanctions and Evidence Preservation

The federal district court for the Southern District of New York has issued another ruling (available here) relating to electronic discovery in the ongoing matter of Zubulake v. UBS Warburg.

The court’s most recent decision, issued October 22, 2003, addresses Zubulake’s motion for sanctions against UBS for its failure to preserve missing backup tapes and deleted emails. See Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, LLC, 2003 WL 22410619 (S.D.N.Y.). Although the court established no definitive guidelines regarding when backup tapes must be preserved, the decision discusses this issue at length, describing both situations where the tapes should be preserved, and situations where they need not be preserved.

After considering UBS’s failure to preserve the missing backup tapes and deleted emails, the court declined to grant an adverse inference instruction against UBS, or to impose on UBS the full cost of restoring certain backup tapes, but did order UBS to bear the plaintiff’s costs of re-deposing certain individuals concerning issues raised either by the destruction of evidence or by any newly-produced emails. Read More

Fero v. Excellus Health Plan, Inc., No. 6:15-cv-06569-EAW (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2018)

Key Insight: Reconsideration of ruling that plaintiffs lacked standing. Expert affidavit shows substantial risk of identity theft and sale of PII and PHI on the dark web, establishing injury-in-fact.

Nature of Case: Class action arising out of a data breach and alleging identity theft.

Electronic Data Involved: Dark web evidence

Keywords: PII and PHI, dark web, identity theft, Joe Church, Digital Shield, X1 Social Discovery

View Case Opinion

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