Tag:Adequacy of Search/Identification or Collection

1
Haroun v. ThoughtWorks, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2020)
2
Charlestown Capital Advisors, LLC v. Acero Junction, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2020)
3
Maurice v. Allstate Insurance Co. (W.D. Wash. 2020)
4
Gross v. Chapman (N.D. Ill. July 28, 2020)
5
6
Berg v. M & F Western Products, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2020)
7
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corporation (E.D. Fla. 2020)
8
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corp., d/b/a Jumbo Supermarket, Inc. (S.D. Fl. , 2020)
9
Optronic Techs., Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Elec. Co. (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020)
10
Optronic Techs., Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Elec. Co. (N.D. Cal., 2020)

Haroun v. ThoughtWorks, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2020)

Key Insight: Plaintiff has no basis to seek “discovery on discovery” from defendants. Plaintiff “does not identify any gaps in production of ESI, any reason to believe that documents have been deleted, or any basis for asserting that Defendants are not searching all relevant and reasonably available sources of ESI that would contain material responsive to Plaintiff’s document requests.” Plaintiff can inquire at deposition and review the document production to identify obvious gaps.

Nature of Case: Employment Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Business documents

Case Summary

Charlestown Capital Advisors, LLC v. Acero Junction, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2020)

Key Insight: Sanctions against Defendants were warranted. Defendants had a duty to preserve relevant ESI at the time of their deletion which occurred a year into the litigation. Defendants failed to take reasonable steps to preserve relevant ESI. Defendants failed to suspend their routine document retention/destruction policy, Defendants’ counsel failed to oversee or play a role in preserving or attempting to reconstruct relevant ESI until 5 months after their deletion, and Defendants’ restoration attempts were inadequate.

Nature of Case: Breach of Contract

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Case Summary

Maurice v. Allstate Insurance Co. (W.D. Wash. 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant had a Motion to Compel Plaintiff to produce information and documents regarding physical and emotional injuries that she purportedly sustained during the accidents giving rise to litigation.

Among the information sought by Defendant were documents and information regarding the negative impact a motor vehicle accident on her social life, hobbies and activities. This included communications, emails, text messages, photographs, video and Facebook posts. Defendant’s Motion was granted, however, Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees and expenses was denied.

Nature of Case: Insurance Contract

Electronic Data Involved: Emails, Text Messages, Photographs, Video and Facebook Posts

Case Summary

Gross v. Chapman (N.D. Ill. July 28, 2020)

Key Insight: Bride and groom called off their wedding after a dispute arose over whether it should be an “adults only” affair. The bride’s parents sued the groom’s parents claiming they were out over $100,000 in wedding costs. After defendants produced 5,000 text messages, the court declined to grant further discovery into the process surrounding how the text messages were collected. A large volume of ESI had already been produced at significant expense to defendants and plaintiff’s motion to compel was based on speculation— “discovery on discovery with no basis other than plaintiffs’ hopeful guess that there must be more texts” and was substantially out of proportion to the needs of the case.

Nature of Case: Invasion of Privacy

Electronic Data Involved: Text Messages

Case Summary

Key Insight: Court rejected additional discovery based off proportionality and discovery already produced. There was no additional proof of unproduced, relevant texts.

Electronic Data Involved: Text Messages

Keywords: additional discovery, proportionality

Berg v. M & F Western Products, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff that was granted by the Court. The Court ordered Plaintiff to conduct a full search of all documents in hard and electronic formats conduct, including but not limited to all data on social media platforms, demand letters issued by Plaintiff or his counsel to third parties referencing this case, documents and materials of Plaintiff’s company, and documents and materials related to the litigation that are in the custody and control of Plaintiff’s current or prior lawyers. The Motion’s request(s) that Plaintiff be compelled to attend his deposition and testify at trial in-person were denied.

Nature of Case: Copyright Infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Social Media, Electronic Documents

Case Summary

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corporation (E.D. Fla. 2020)

Key Insight: Counsel has a duty to oversee their clients’ collection of information and documents during the discovery process, especially when ESI is involved. Here, counsel failed to adequately supervise the ESI collection process. Counsel had no knowledge of the search efforts or process taken by Defendant is its discovery collection. Ultimately, the Defendant was given a final opportunity to produce responsive discovery. The parties were ordered to attempt to come to an agreement regarding and ESI protocol that included relevant data sources, custodians, and search terms.

Nature of Case: Employment Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents Generally

Case Summary

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. M1 5100 Corp., d/b/a Jumbo Supermarket, Inc. (S.D. Fl. , 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant “self-collected” without involvement of counsel. Court gave defendant one last chance to produce as 5 months remained in discovery, with active involvement of counsel.

Nature of Case: Age discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI

Keywords: certification, party collection

View Case Opinion

Optronic Techs., Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Elec. Co. (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2020)

Key Insight: Sanctions were warranted because counsel failed to adequately supervise Defendant’s discovery responses. While counsel is not required to personally conduct or directly supervise a client’s discovery collection and review process, they must make a reasonable effort to ensure the client produces all response documents. It is not sufficient to only provide guidance on how to search for documents without following up on whether the guidance was followed and what steps were actually taken.

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Documents

Case Summary

Optronic Techs., Inc. v. Ningbo Sunny Elec. Co. (N.D. Cal., 2020)

Key Insight: Counsel must be involved with discovery to certify process followed. Counsel’s lack of involvement warranted sanctions in this case.

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI

Keywords: sanctions, certification

View Case Opinion

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