Key Insight: Court held defendants in contempt for failing to preserve documents in compliance with a court order; reasoning that because documents had been destroyed, no monetary sanction would coerce their production, the court ordered that defendants pay the reasonable costs associated with the government having to bring and prosecute the motion
Nature of Case: SEC litigation
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Key Insight: Court denied motion for spoliation sanctions absent evidence of fraud or bad faith and where the court did not find sufficient evidence of prejudice
Nature of Case: Breach of employment agreement
Electronic Data Involved: ESI
Key Insight: Despite noting that it was ?undisputed? that plaintiffs? witnesses did not modify their practice of ?deleting most emails within a short time of receiving them? even after they reasonably anticipated litigation, the court declined to impose an adverse inference where the record supported a finding that the witnesses ?destroyed the emails in the ordinary course of business unmotivated by any bad faith.?
Nature of Case: Fraudulent inducement, breach of fiduciary duty
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Court rejected plaintiff?s assertion that her January 22, 2009 letter to human resources put defendants on notice of its duty to preserve where the letter complained about her manager but did not threaten litigation and instead suggested ?a non-litigious resolution,? where plaintiff testified that she had no intention of suing at the time she sent the letter, where plaintiff waited over ten months after sending the letter to bring the instant litigation, and where the manager?s testimony that he thought the letter could give rise to legal ramifications was not sufficient to trigger the corporation?s duty to preserve
Nature of Case: Failure to accomodate, retaliation in violation of ADA
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Court found duty to preserve arose upon defendant?s consultation with counsel regarding possible infringement on plaintiff?s patent but abated upon the parties? successful negotiation of licensing agreement; court found that defendant had no control and thus no obligation to preserve certain documents from an employee of a Hong-Kong based affiliate; regarding an email folder accidentally deleted following inadvertent ?exposure? to automated purge function, court declined to find the loss was a result of negligence and found that plaintiff failed to establish the relevance of information lost and declined to impose sanctions
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: ESI, emails
Key Insight: Court granted motion for expedited discovery to issue subpoenas to relevant ISPs seeking information sufficient to identify Doe defendants
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Identifying information from ISP
Key Insight: Court denied defendants? motion for a protective order precluding plaintiffs? inquiry (in deposition) into defendants? preservation efforts where, although a litigation hold letter is generally privileged, ?the basic details surrounding the litigation hold are not? and where the court found that the answers to certain of plaintiffs? questions, including inquiries into the ?overwrite function issue? (apparently related to a failure to stop automatic deletion), would ?allow the parties to craft a narrow, manageable ESI plan?
Nature of Case: Employment litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Information related to legal hold efforts
Key Insight: Court granted motion for sanctions and imposed permissive adverse inferences as to two categories of information which the court found had been intentionally shredded and/or deleted despite a duty to preserve
Nature of Case: Civil rights class action
Electronic Data Involved: Emails, ESI
Key Insight: Court denied motion for spoliation sanctions where plaintiff was unable to establish that the relevant hard drives were destroyed after the duty to preserve arose and where plaintiff was unable to establish that the in-car video at issue ever existed or was destroyed after the duty to preserve arose in light of defendants? testimony that because of a ?recorder malfunctioned? no video existed
Nature of Case: Civil claims arising from alleged mistreatment upon arrest
Electronic Data Involved: Four hard drives, officer’s in-car video
Key Insight: Where detective preserved transcripts of internet chats by copying them into Word documents saved onto CD and verifying that they were identical to the original transcripts rather than preserving the original transcript on a department hard drive for purposes of saving space, defendant?s due process rights were not denied by destruction of the original transcript absent evidence that they would ?significantly contribute to his defense? and were lost as a result of bad faith; transcripts in Word documents were properly admitted in light of detective?s testimony that he participated in the chats and that the transcripts were accurate; transcripts did not violate best evidence rule absent evidence that originals were destroyed in bad faith; admission of transcripts did not violate rule of completeness; district court did not err in denying request for jury instruction on spoliation and destruction of evidence where there was no evidence that portions of chat were destroyed (because detective testified he saved conversations in their entirety) and no showing prejudice
Nature of Case: Crimnal charges related to attempt to coerce minor to engage in sezual activity
Electronic Data Involved: Chat transcripts
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.