Electronic Discovery Law

Legal issues, news and best practices relating to the discovery of electronically stored information.

1
Allen v. Armstrong, 2004 WL 1533934 (D. Conn. Apr. 5, 2004)
2
Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2004 WL 417193 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2004)
3
Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2004 WL 1837997 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2004)
4
Adams v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 54 F.R.D. 220 (W.D. Va. 1972)
5
The Volume Problem of E-Discovery
6
State-Specific E-Discovery Rules
7
The Sedona Conference
8
Ken Withers
9
Lawyers for Civil Justice
10
Socha Consulting LLC

Allen v. Armstrong, 2004 WL 1533934 (D. Conn. Apr. 5, 2004)

Key Insight: Order memorialized parties’ agreement regarding motion to compel: defendants agreed to produce all emails that exist in printed form, but would not conduct search of electronic database to retrieve emails since it would be cost prohibitive; defendant understood it would be precluded from offering evidence at trial that was not properly disclosed in discovery

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2004 WL 417193 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2004)

Key Insight: Motion for sanctions for destruction of email denied since plaintiff failed to follow procedure set forth in court’s prior order which would have required plaintiff to file a petition seeking the appointment of a computer forensics expert, and instead waited over seven months to bring the issue to the court in the form of a motion for sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted email

Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2004 WL 1837997 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied motion for default judgment but granted motion for an adverse inference instruction and $20,000 in monetary sanctions where, in advance of court-ordered inspection, defendants deleted from their computers numerous electronic files which had been copied from former employer’s computer systems prior to their resignations, and, after the inspection, defendants failed to comply with court’s order that they delete all of plaintiffs’ files from their computers

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary information in electronic form

Adams v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 54 F.R.D. 220 (W.D. Va. 1972)

Key Insight: Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of defendant’s current computerized master payroll file and all computer print-outs for W-2 forms of defendant’s employees, given accuracy of records and inexpensiveness of production

Nature of Case: Race discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized master payroll file

The Volume Problem of E-Discovery

Article by Thomas F. Gleason and Patrick M. Connors published on Lexis Nexis Practice Area News
Let’s skip the obvious and unanswerable question — why anybody could believe there was joy in litigation in the first place — and ask what prompts this now common sentiment. Is there truly an explosion of electronic evidence, creating mind-numbing discovery and inspection sessions and costs threatening to swamp the financial viability of commercial litigation? The answer, in these writers’ opinions is yes, and the basic problem is the amount of “stuff” that computers create. Read more.

The Sedona Conference

The Sedona Conference(SM) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) research and educational institute, dedicated to the advanced study of law and policy in the areas of antitrust, intellectual property, and complex litigation. Since its founding in 1997, it has developed an international reputation as a balanced and forward-looking law and policy think tank that has and will continue to provide constructive contributions to the reasoned and just development of law and policy. The Sedona Guidelines and The Sedona Principles have come to have been known as the preeminent thought-leadership pieces in the field.

Ken Withers

Ken Withers is a senior judicial education attorney with the Federal Judicial Center in Washington, D.C., where he is responsible for developing educational programs for federal judges and Court-employed attorneys. These programs include electronic discovery, technology in the criminal justice system, and advanced uses of technology in the administration of justice. Ken is also heavily involved in the federal rules amendment process.

Lawyers for Civil Justice

Created by defense trial lawyers and corporate counsel, Lawyers for Civil Justice (LCJ) is a national coalition supporting excellence, fairness and improvements within the civil justice system. It supports activities at both the state and national level designed to achieve reforms, which will ensure balance in the civil justice system. Greater predictability in damage awards, streamlining the discovery process, and improving the management of litigation and scarce judicial resources are all long range goals of LCJ. Read More

Socha Consulting LLC

As an e-discovery special master and expert witness, George Socha tracks e-discovery happenings, articles, and books and provides technology vendor information through his website, sochaconsulting.com. George is also a researcher and frequent speaker on the subject of electronic discovery.

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