Tag:Backup Media Recycling

1
Novit v. Metropolitan School District of Warren Township (S.D. Ind. 2021)
2
Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. 2020)
3
Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. May 22, 2020)
4
Cruz v. G-Star Inc., No. 17 Civ. 7685 (PGG) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2019)
5
Wolff v. United Airlines, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-00591-RM-SKC (D. Colo. Sep. 17, 2019).
6
Incardone v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (S.D. Florida, Miami Division, 2019)
7
4DD Holdings, LLC. v. USA (US Court of Federal Claims, 2019)
8
Stovall v. Brykan Legends, LLC (D. KS, 2019)
9
Franklin v. Howard Brown Health Ctr., No. 17 C 8376 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 4, 2018)
10
Hernandez, et al. v. City of Houston, No. 4:16-CV-3577 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 30, 2018)

Novit v. Metropolitan School District of Warren Township (S.D. Ind. 2021)

Key Insight: Plaintiffs filed a motion for sanctions on spoliation related to the video footage from a school bus where plaintiffs’ child suffered injuries. Defendant permitted plaintiffs to view the video of the incident and also produced the footage to plaintiffs in discovery. Plaintiffs later asked for extended video coverage from the date of the incident. Defendant did not have additional video because the bus hard drive had either been looped over, wiped clean, or used for parts. The court noted, “a spoliation sanction is proper only when a party has a duty to preserve evidence because he knew, or should have known, that litigation was imminent, and the movant demonstrates that the evidence was destroyed in bad faith, with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation.” Thus, the court found no evidence to support a blanket accusation of spoliation when defendant preserved the relevant footage, acted reasonably by saving the relevant portion, and placing the bus hard drive back into operation.

Nature of Case: Personal injury, Civil rights

Electronic Data Involved: Video footage

Case Summary

Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. 2020)

Key Insight: The plaintiffs, current and former mortgage/residential loan officers of defendant, filed a motion for spoliation sanctions and entry of default judgment against defendant based on the failure to preserve and intentional destruction of email accounts and calendar data. The court found: (1) the ESI was relevant to the claims in the lawsuit; (2) defendant breached its duties by intentionally destroying ESI after learning that employees had accused defendant of not paying overtime and after being threatened with a lawsuit, and even after the lawsuit was filed and formal requests for production were received, it paid to order the destruction of additional backup tapes; and (3) the evidence is irretrievably lost. The court declined to enter a default judgment, concluding “[t]he availability of less drastic sanctions that have the ability to mitigate the damage caused by defendant’s egregious destruction of evidence is a powerful factor that militates against imposing dispositive sanctions.”

Nature of Case: Wage and Hour Class Action

Electronic Data Involved: Email and calendar accounts

Case Summary

Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. May 22, 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant deleted backup tapes after litigation hold notice issued. Spoliation occurred, but no default judgment

Nature of Case: class-action employment

Electronic Data Involved: Backup tapes

Keywords: sanctions, backup tapes, destruction

View Case Opinion

Cruz v. G-Star Inc., No. 17 Civ. 7685 (PGG) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2019)

Key Insight: Plaintiff never articulated claims that would make reasonable person believe lawsuit was likely. No duty to preserve had yet attached when Plaintiff when to HR.

Nature of Case: Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: emails and SAP account

Keywords: Imminent litigation; adverse inference

View Case Opinion

Wolff v. United Airlines, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-00591-RM-SKC (D. Colo. Sep. 17, 2019).

Key Insight: Both sides moved for spoliation sanctions. Court was troubled by failure to suspend automatic deletion and loss of personal cell phone, but imposed no sanctions.

Nature of Case: Employee Termination/Discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: cell phones, company computer, notebooks

Keywords: spoliation; sanctions; automatic deletion

View Case Opinion

Incardone v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. (S.D. Florida, Miami Division, 2019)

Key Insight: The duty to preserve should be proportional and reasonable, not perfect and absolute.

Nature of Case: Rule 37(e) analysis of the defendant’s actions

Electronic Data Involved: Video Clips, CCTV and VDR

Keywords: Preserve, camera, viewable, “recorded continuously”, CCTV, RCCL

View Case Opinion

4DD Holdings, LLC. v. USA (US Court of Federal Claims, 2019)

Key Insight: whether the government intentionally acted in a way that destroyed evidence

Nature of Case: copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: TETRA healthcare data federation software, hard drives, digital information

Keywords: spoliation, reasonable steps to preserve, decommissioning

View Case Opinion

Stovall v. Brykan Legends, LLC (D. KS, 2019)

Key Insight: video surveillance showing incident on which part of complaint is based could not be found by D, P motions for sanction for spoliation of evidence.

Nature of Case: employment discrimination, sexual harassment, workers compensation

Electronic Data Involved: Video surveillance

Keywords: spoliation, sanctions, preservation, surveillance, harassment, employment discrimination, bad faith

View Case Opinion

Franklin v. Howard Brown Health Ctr., No. 17 C 8376 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 4, 2018)

Key Insight: ineffective litigation hold, failure to preserve electronic evidence

Nature of Case: workplace harassment and discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: emails, text messages, instant messages

Keywords: instant messages, faulty and failed litigation hold, the defendant “bollixed its litigation hold”

View Case Opinion

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