Tag: Data Preservation

1
America West Bank Members v. State of Utah (D. Utah 2021)
2
Axis Insurance Company v. American Specialty Insurance & Risk Services, Inc. (N.D. Ind. 2021)
3
Aviles v. S&P Global, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2021)
4
Integrated Communications & Technologies v.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services Company (D. Mass. Aug. 13, 2020)
5
Alsadi v. Intel Corporation (D. Ariz. 2020)
6
Alsadi v. Intel Corporation (D. Az., 2020)
7
QueTel Corp v. Hisham Abbas (4th Cir., 2020)
8
Denson v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (D. Utah, 2020)
9
Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. 2020)
10
Bolding v. Banner Bank (W.D. Wash. May 22, 2020)

America West Bank Members v. State of Utah (D. Utah 2021)

Key Insight: Plaintiff filed a motion to compel after learning through the discovery process that defendants purged or lost emails and documents. Plaintiff sought “discovery on discovery” to discern the identities of individuals whose emails would have been responsive if those emails were still available, the identification of documents or categories of documents no longer available, and an explanation as to why other responsive documents were not produced. The court granted plaintiff’s request but found it “strictly limited to the purged former employee email accounts.” No additional depositions were permitted and plaintiff’s fourteen interrogatories on this topic were “neither reasonable nor proportional” to the limited nature of the discovery needed.

Nature of Case: Civil rights

Electronic Data Involved: Email and documents

Case Summary

Aviles v. S&P Global, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 2021)

Key Insight: Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel to allow them unfettered access to all information located on a server. Defendant objected, claiming that Plaintiffs had no legal right to the server, and information on the server was irrelevant, confidential and/or privileged. The Court found that the request (Motion to Compel) was overbroad and premature, and denied Plaintiffs’ Motion.

Nature of Case:Fraud, Shareholder Suit, Diversity Jurisdiction

Electronic Data Involved: Hard Drive, Server,

Case Summary

Integrated Communications & Technologies v.Hewlett-Packard Financial Services Company (D. Mass. Aug. 13, 2020)

Key Insight: Spoliation had occurred, but no default judgment issued. Evidence regarding destruction was allowed, no testimony from plaintiffs regarding unpreserved ESI and adverse inference instruction.

Nature of Case: Breach of Contract

Electronic Data Involved: Emails and Computers

Keywords: adverse inference, sanctions

View Case Opinion

Alsadi v. Intel Corporation (D. Ariz. 2020)

Key Insight: The meaning of ESI is expansive, includes any type of information stored electronically, and is not limited to data stored on a computer system. Rule 37(e), not inherent authority, is the legal standard for determining whether and what sanctions are appropriate for the loss of discoverable ESI. A negative inference sanction with only be imposed if the spoliating party intentionally lost or destroyed data so it could not be used in litigation.

Nature of Case: Tort

Electronic Data Involved: Detector Device Data

Case Summary

Alsadi v. Intel Corporation (D. Az., 2020)

Key Insight: Court ruled that ESI is expansive and includes information stored electronically, not just information on a computer system as plaintiffs argued. FRCP overrules state law or inherent power to sanction. No negative inference allowed.

Nature of Case: negligence, loss of consortium

Electronic Data Involved: records of ambient gas levels

Keywords: sanctions, negative inference, inherent authority

View Case Opinion

QueTel Corp v. Hisham Abbas (4th Cir., 2020)

Key Insight: Defendants had deleted relevant files just before forensic imaging occurred. Court sanctioned Defendant and issue permanent injunction.

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Source Code and files on laptops

Keywords: sanctions, injunctions, source code

View Case Opinion

Denson v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (D. Utah, 2020)

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s explanation regarding loss of evidence had changed and court ruled that defendant was entitled to have a third party collect and preserve the evidence. Plaintiff offered passwords to accounts, but court was concerned about possible destruction given Plaintiff’s changing explanation regarding social media accounts and recording.

Nature of Case: Sexual Assault

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic Devices and Cloud Based Accounts; Recording of conversation

Keywords: invasion of privacy, loss of evidence

View Case Opinion

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

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