Key Insight: Defendants’ failure to produce accident report amounted to spoliation of evidence and provided additional ground for denying defense motion for summary judgment
Nature of Case: Slip and fall personal injury
Electronic Data Involved: Accident report prepared by defendant
Key Insight: Court imposed monetary sanctions but not adverse inference instruction where defendant negligently failed to implement adequate litigation hold and preserve electronic evidence, but evidence was insufficient to show defendant acted in bad faith or with culpable state of mind or that plaintiff had suffered any prejudice
Nature of Case: Environmental litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Email and backup tapes
Key Insight: Court entered default judgment as discovery sanction where forensic evidence showed that defendant deliberately used ?wiping? software to permanently remove data from her hard drive and stated: “The sanction in the present case is to deter other defendants in similar cases from attempting to destroy or conceal evidence of their wrongdoing.”
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive
Key Insight: Court applied Zubulake factors and granted in part defendant?s motion to shift costs, holding that defendant was entitled to recover 30 percent of the costs of restoring and searching backup tapes for responsive emails of one former employee, stating: “[I]f a party creates its own burden or expense by converting into an inaccessible format data that it should have reasonably foreseen would be discoverable material at a time when it should have anticipated litigation, then it should not be entitled to shift the costs of restoring and searching the data.”
Nature of Case: Gender discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes
Key Insight: Where forensic inspection of plaintiff?s laptop and disks showed evidence of tampering, including: deleted files, system date and time manipulations, access histories showing that various relevant documents were accessed after court?s order and before plaintiff?s second deposition, and other fragments of relevant documents and emails that had not been produced, and plaintiff’s explanations “verge[d] on the absurd,” court found that plaintiff had engaged in an egregious pattern of misconduct, dismissed complaint with prejudice, and invited defendant to submit an application for costs and attorneys? fees
Nature of Case: Wrongful termination
Electronic Data Involved: Laptop; drafts of plaintiff’s resume
Key Insight: Court rejected trustee’s request for entry of default judgment based upon based on law firm’s failure to retain and timely produce relevant documents and electronically-stored information, but found that monetary sanctions were appropriate; trustee awarded his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in pursuing all discovery in the adversary proceeding
Nature of Case: Adversary proceeding in bankruptcy court
Electronic Data Involved: Backup tapes
Key Insight: Adverse inference and monetary sanctions warranted, but not default judgment, where defendant acknowledged that its personnel routinely deleted emails without regard to whether the deleted emails were relevant to the litigation, but behavior did not constitute a pattern of deliberately deceptive litigation practices and there was evidence that the actual number of emails lost was small
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Where Spain failed to place a timely and adequate litigation hold in its agencies and ministries, court found that Spain violated its discovery obligations under the FRCP and observed that relevant email and electronic records probably no longer existed; court granted defendant’s motion to compel and invited defendant to to file an application requesting the relief, remedy, or sanction it deemed appropriate in light of the court?s findings
Nature of Case: Litigation brought by the government of Spain arising from shipping casualty and oil spill
Electronic Data Involved: Email and electronic records
Key Insight: In stipulated order, parties agreed that plaintiffs would preserve hard drives used by plaintiffs and plaintiffs? decedents and that such hard drives would be imaged and analyzed pursuant to an agreed forensic examination protocol; that responsive ESI would be collected by defendants from defendants’ active IT environment and not from backup tapes absent exceptional circumstances, and that plaintiffs would defer to defendants as to the format of production
Nature of Case: Personal injury product liability
Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives, ESI
Key Insight: Trial court did not err in denying motion for curative jury instructions, a sanction of default, and, after the verdict, a new trial, based upon defendant’s failure to produce a draft expert report; finding no misconduct, trial court had observed: “While I agree that . . . hard copies of draft [expert] reports are discoverable, I am aware of no legal principle that would require a testifying expert witness to separately retain all electronic drafts, including those that were overridden or subsumed during the drafting process.”
Nature of Case: Insurance coverage
Electronic Data Involved: Draft expert report
Copyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.