Tag: Format Of Production

1
State v. Cartwright, 336 Or. 408, 85 P.3d 305 (2004)
2
Glover v. Standard Fed. Bank, 2001 WL 34635710 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2001)
3
Timpken Co. v. United States, 659 F. Supp. 239 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1987)
4
Hahn v. Minn. Beef Ind., 2002 WL 32667146 (D. Minn. Mar. 8, 2002)
5
TPS, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Defense, 330 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2003)
6
Hines v. Widnall, 183 F.R.D. 596 (N.D. Fla. 1998)
7
Uniroyal Chem. Co. Inc. v. Syngenta Crop Protection, 224 F.R.D. 53 (D. Conn. 2004)
8
Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 2004 WL 1949062 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2004) (Unpublished)
9
United States v. Visa USA, Inc., 1999 WL 476437 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 7, 1999)
10
Marcin Eng’g, LLC v. Founders at Grizzly Ranch LLC, 219 F.R.D. 516 (D. Colo. 2003)

State v. Cartwright, 336 Or. 408, 85 P.3d 305 (2004)

Key Insight: Concluding that defendant had a right to obtain audiotaped prior statements of witnesses for use in cross-examining the individuals whose statements were on the tapes, court noted in footnote: “The audiotapes at issue here are the functional equivalent of written statements. It would be a towering triumph of form over substance to hold that [defendant’s former employer’s] choice of an electronic, rather than a documentary, mode of preserving the witness’ statements puts the statements beyond the reach of a subpoena duces tecum.”

Nature of Case: Criminal sexual harassment

Electronic Data Involved: Audiotapes of witness’ statements made by defendant’s former employer

Glover v. Standard Fed. Bank, 2001 WL 34635710 (D. Minn. Nov. 9, 2001)

Key Insight: Where evidence showed there was no feasible and economic electronic means by which certain data could be produced, court ruled that, to the extent defendants intended to introduce evidence related to such data at trial, defendants would be required to produce all such evidence, documentary, electronic or otherwise, upon which they intend to rely

Nature of Case: Class action

Electronic Data Involved: Information regarding damages, offsets and class member eligibility

Timpken Co. v. United States, 659 F. Supp. 239 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1987)

Key Insight: Defendant ordered to provide copies of computer tapes containing data previously provided in hard copy form

Nature of Case: Challenge of decision by Dept. of Commerce to deny plaintiff access to computer tapes in trade investigation

Electronic Data Involved: Computer tapes containing costs and sales data

Hahn v. Minn. Beef Ind., 2002 WL 32667146 (D. Minn. Mar. 8, 2002)

Key Insight: Where, after months of discovery disputes, reports upon which defendant urged plaintiff to rely in lieu of full database turned out to be inaccurate, court denied plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment for discovery abuse and instead postponed trial so that defendant could produce accurate information; however, court imposed monetary sanctions against defendant representing plaintiff’s legal and expert fees for time spent working with inaccurate data

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Database, reports, electronic data

TPS, Inc. v. U.S. Dept. of Defense, 330 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2003)

Key Insight: Reversing summary judgment for DOD, court stated that relevant inquiry as to whether an agency must provide information in requested format is whether, in general, a requested format is one that is “readily reproducible” by the agency, benchmarked against the agency’s “normal business as usual approach” with respect to reproducing data in the ordinary course of the agency’s business (not limited solely to the context of FOIA requests)

Nature of Case: FOIA action

Electronic Data Involved: Two electronic files in “zipped” format

Hines v. Widnall, 183 F.R.D. 596 (N.D. Fla. 1998)

Key Insight: Granting plaintiff’s’ motion to compel production of computerized images of employment records which were created to facilitate review of the documents by geographically-dispersed defense counsel, court held that images did not constitute attorney work product since images did not contain mental impressions or legal theories and would not give plaintiffs insight into defense strategy or opinions; plaintiffs to pay only nominal copying costs and not portion of $250,000 imaging cost incurred by defendant

Nature of Case: Race discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized images of employment records

Uniroyal Chem. Co. Inc. v. Syngenta Crop Protection, 224 F.R.D. 53 (D. Conn. 2004)

Key Insight: Where plaintiff demonstrated that allowing defendant unrestricted access to database would result in a clearly defined and serious injury, court held that plaintiff’s “confidential – attorneys’ eyes only” designation was appropriate and denied motion to compel

Nature of Case: Contract dispute

Electronic Data Involved: Database containing research data

Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 2004 WL 1949062 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2004) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Noting differences between federal law and New York law regarding cost-shifting in discovery, court stated it did not have sufficient information about the costs associated with the requested discovery, but concluded that until plaintiffs indicated a willingness to pay for the requested electronic discovery (whatever its cost), court would not order its production

Nature of Case: Claims based on breach of contract and for an accounting

Electronic Data Involved: Computer data

United States v. Visa USA, Inc., 1999 WL 476437 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 7, 1999)

Key Insight: Parties agreed to narrow the scope of archived email search, both in terms of the number of employees whose email was to be produced and the number of days per month for which that email was to be produced; defendants to bear cost of production ($130,000) initially, but court reserved decision about who ultimately would bear cost; court denied plaintiff’s request that defendant make its production available on CD-ROM

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Archived email

Marcin Eng’g, LLC v. Founders at Grizzly Ranch LLC, 219 F.R.D. 516 (D. Colo. 2003)

Key Insight: Court denied defendant’s motion to extend expert discovery deadline for purposes of reviewing plaintiff’s experts computer data and computerized versions of preliminary and superseded versions of work, where material was produced in hard copy form months earlier and defendant had been dilatory in reviewing it

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and tort claims

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized data and superceded and preliminary drafts of expert

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