Tag:Data Preservation

1
Strough v. General Motors, LLC (District of Colorado, 2019)
2
J.S.T. Corporation v. Robert Bosch LLC et al (District Court of Eastern Michigan, 2019)
3
Mafille v. Kaiser-Francis Oil Co (N.D. Oklahoma, 2019)
4
DR Distrib., LLC v. 21 Century Smoking, Inc. (N.D. Ill., 2019)
5
Stovall v. Brykan Legends, LLC (D. KS, 2019)
6
RightCHOICE Managed Care, Inc., et al. v. Hospital Partners, Inc., et al. (W.D. MO, 2019)
7
Culhane v. Wal-Mart Supercenter (District Court of Eastern District of Michigan, 2019)
8
Scarbrough v. Virginia College, LLC (District Court of Northern District of Alabama, 2019)
9
OptoLum v. Cree, Inc., No, 1:17CV687 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 28, 2018)
10
Dufrene v. American Tugs Inc. (District Court of Eastern Louisiana, 2018)

Strough v. General Motors, LLC (District of Colorado, 2019)

Key Insight: protective order without a sharing provision is unfair to future similarily situated plaintiffs.

Nature of Case: product liability

Electronic Data Involved: All relevant discovery

Keywords: protective order, sharing provision, class action, similarly situated plaintiff

View Case Opinion

J.S.T. Corporation v. Robert Bosch LLC et al (District Court of Eastern Michigan, 2019)

Key Insight: whether the parties have acted in good faith, which shall relate to both the substance of the parties? accusations of misconduct, as well as the parties? decision to file an accusation of misconduct.

Nature of Case: misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: emails

Keywords: foxconn, hit2

View Case Opinion

Mafille v. Kaiser-Francis Oil Co (N.D. Oklahoma, 2019)

Key Insight: whether sanctions are appropriate where defendant donated plaintiff’s computer per usual practice but after receiving preservation notice

Nature of Case: workplace discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records

Keywords: sanctions, destruction, failure to preserve

View Case Opinion

DR Distrib., LLC v. 21 Century Smoking, Inc. (N.D. Ill., 2019)

Key Insight: Plaintiffs object to dismissal of a counterclaim against them because Defendant’s desire to dismiss the claim is related to loss of relevant ESI

Nature of Case: defamation, trademark infringement

Electronic Data Involved: E-mail, instant messages

Keywords: counterclaim, motion to amend, diligent, dismissal

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

RightCHOICE Managed Care, Inc., et al. v. Hospital Partners, Inc., et al. (W.D. MO, 2019)

Key Insight: objections to requests for production, overly broad requests, overly broad objections, merit-less objections

Nature of Case: Hospital Fraud, laboratory tests billing scheme, insurance fraud

Electronic Data Involved: Billing data, invoices, financial records

Keywords: fifth amendment, overly broad, unduly burdensome, preservation efforts, retention notice, objection specificity

View Case Opinion

Culhane v. Wal-Mart Supercenter (District Court of Eastern District of Michigan, 2019)

Key Insight: whether the defendant acted with the intent to deprive plaintiff of the information’s use in the litigation

Nature of Case: personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: videotape

Keywords: videotape, garage door

View Case Opinion

Scarbrough v. Virginia College, LLC (District Court of Northern District of Alabama, 2019)

Key Insight: whether giving compelling reason is necessary for the court to supplement an order to obey the law

Nature of Case: breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: employment records and emails

Keywords: receivership estate, mass layoffs

View Case Opinion

OptoLum v. Cree, Inc., No, 1:17CV687 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 28, 2018)

Key Insight: Defendant’s email archive system had had issues and was replaced before litigation filed, but servers were kept. Stubbed E-mail attachments were inaccessible. defendant showed attachments were potentially relevant and motion to compel was granted. Costs were to be split since it would be undue burden on plaintiff alone and they had not acted in bad faith.

Nature of Case: Patent Infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Stubbed E-mail Attachments

Keywords: Restoration, undue burden, bad faith, cost shifting

View Case Opinion

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