Tag:Discoverability Scope, Including FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope (Prior to Dec. 1, 2015)

1
Williams v. Hernandez, 2004 WL 1161318 (S.D.N.Y. May 25, 2004)
2
In re Worldcom, Inc. Sec. Litig., 2004 WL 1068032 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2004)
3
York v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31465306 (N.D. Okla. Nov. 4, 2002)
4
Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)
5
Hagemeyer N. Am., Inc. v. Gateway Data Sci. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 594 (E.D. Wis. 2004)
6
Williams v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 665 F.2d 918 (9th Cir. 1982)

Williams v. Hernandez, 2004 WL 1161318 (S.D.N.Y. May 25, 2004)

Key Insight: Production request for all email to or from individual defendant during specified period was overly broad and burdensome, since plaintiff failed to justify the wholesale production of emails and failed to indicate why there would be relevant information concerning her claims in such emails

Nature of Case: Sex discrimination, negligent hiring and battery

Electronic Data Involved: Email

In re Worldcom, Inc. Sec. Litig., 2004 WL 1068032 (S.D.N.Y. May 13, 2004)

Key Insight: Parties ordered to resolve, within five days, scope of electronic discovery to be made by each plaintiff through the completion of the meet and confer process; if no resolution reached, hearing to be held six days later to resolve outstanding issues

Nature of Case: Individual securities fraud actions

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic discovery

York v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31465306 (N.D. Okla. Nov. 4, 2002)

Key Insight: Defendant required to produce documents regarding use of software program and designate Rule 30(b)(6) witness to testify about defendant’s use of software program; defendant allowed to submit protective order “to safeguard divulgence of such information to third parties”

Nature of Case: Insurance bad faith

Electronic Data Involved: Colossus computer software program used by insurance industry to evaluate claims

Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)

Key Insight: Order compelling defendant surgeon to produce his surgical database, to include information related to all the cholecystectomy procedures defendant had ever performed (with the patient names redacted) was abuse of discretion; matter remanded with directions that the court examine the database contents in camera to determine relevance and privilege issues

Nature of Case: Medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: Surgical database maintained by defendant surgeon

Hagemeyer N. Am., Inc. v. Gateway Data Sci. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 594 (E.D. Wis. 2004)

Key Insight: Adopting Zubulake and McPeek approaches, court ordered defendant to restore a sampling of five backup tapes selected by the plaintiff; parties would thereafter be required to make additional submissions addressing whether the burden or expense of satisfying the entire request was proportionate to the likely benefit

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

Williams v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 665 F.2d 918 (9th Cir. 1982)

Key Insight: Court did not abuse discretion in denying request for computer tapes where requesting party already possessed all information from tapes on wage cards and were not deprived of any data

Electronic Data Involved: Computer tapes containing wage information

Copyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.