FRCP 37(e) Preservation (effective Dec. 1, 2015) – Page 21

Keim v. ADF Midatlantic LLC, No. 12-CV-80577-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN, 2016 WL 7048835 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 5, 2016)

Dec 01 2016

Key Insight: Defendant brought a motion for sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P 37(e)(1) alleging Plaintiff failed to preserve text messages on his cell phone. The text messages at issue were dated in February and March of 2011, while Plaintiff admitted that he anticipated bringing suit on or before October 1, 2011. In his deposition, Plaintiff testified that ?he deletes most of his text messages and does not ?keep them around that long,?? and after carefully reviewing Plaintiff?s deposition transcript, it was ?clear to the court that Plaintiff is utterly confused and uncertain of anything related to the existence or deletion of the February to March 2011 text messages.? The court found that (i) it was possible that the text messages at issue were deleted before a duty to preserve arose; (ii) the ESI was not ?lost because a party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it;? and (iii) the evidence could not be discovered from other sources. Defendant?s motion for sanctions was denied.

Electronic Data Involved: Text messages

Marshall v. Dentfirst, P.C., No. 1:14-cv-2421-WSD, 2016 WL 1222270 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 24, 2016)

Dec 01 2016

Key Insight: Plaintiff seeks sanctions for Defendant allegedly failing to preserve ESI including browsing history, emails and pretreatment documents on Plaintiff?s work computer. The court quotes Sentry Select Ins. Co. v. Treadwell, 734 S.E.2d 818, 848 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012), ?it is axiomatic that in order for there to be spoliation, the evidence in question must have existed and been in the control of a party.? Plaintiff failed to show that the alleged spoliated information existed at the time Defendant reasonably could have anticipated litigation but that the Defendant failed to preserve it. The court continued its analysis, finding that ?even if the evidence existed at the time Defendant had a duty to preserve it,? Plaintiff failed to show prejudice (which could have been mitigated through depositions) or bad faith on the part of Defendant. The court denied Plaintiff?s motion.

Electronic Data Involved: Internet browsing history, emails

First Amer. Title Ins. Co. v. N.W. Title Ins. Agency, LLC, No. 2:15-cv-00229, 2016 WL 4548398 (D. Utah Aug. 31, 2016)

Dec 01 2016

Key Insight: Court concluded that Defendants ?taking steps? to start a competing company even if it was known that starting the company ?would be contentious and actively opposed? was insufficient to establish imminent litigation triggering a duty to preserve (note that imminence is the test in the 10th Cir.); court assessed requests for sanctions as to multiple sources of ESI and largely denied those motions absent evidence of prejudice or that the information could not be restored or replaced but did impose sanctions for non-party employee of Defendants? loss of potentially relevant ESI and hard copy taken from Plaintiff (both assessed ?under the same rubric of Rule 37?) and ordered that the parties would be permitted to present evidence of the spoliation to the jury

Electronic Data Involved: ESI & hardcopy

McQueen v. Aramark Corp. – 201611 (D. Utah, 2016)

Nov 29 2016

Key Insight: Sanctions imposed after defendant’s failure to preserve relevant ESI after receiving a preservation letter from plaintiff.

Nature of Case: Wrongful death.

Electronic Data Involved: ESI work orders and related paper records.

Keywords: Defendant acted with gross negligence, but without intent to deprive the plaintiff of the information’s use in the litigation.

View Case Opinion

First American Title Insurance Company v. Northwest Title Insurance Agency, LLC, No. 2:15-cv-00229-DN-PMW (D. Utah, Aug. 31, 2016).

Aug 31 2016

Key Insight: no spoliation becuase no evidence responsive data deleted and no prejudice. Oral litigation hold upheld, but be wary.

Nature of Case: Breach of Contract; Unfair Competition

Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI- personal emails, files from work computer

Keywords: oral litigation hold; spoliation

Emergency Response Specialists, Inc v. CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc N.D. Ala. August 4, 2016 (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2016)

Aug 04 2016

Key Insight: lost evidence, data preservation

Nature of Case: breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: destroyed electronic records of experts

Keywords: Case dismissal applicable only in extreme circumstances, defensible collection

View Case Opinion

Saller v. QVC, Inc. (ED Pa., 2016)

Jul 29 2016

Key Insight: Discovery sanctions motion.

Nature of Case: Workplace discrimination.

Electronic Data Involved: Employment records including personnel files of supervisors and documents regarding performance of other employees.

Keywords: Failure to preserve, search terms, motion to compel.

View Case Opinion

Martinez v. City of Chicago, No. 14-cv-369 (N.D. Ill. June 29, 2016).

Jun 29 2016

Key Insight: Plaintiff was arrested while police pursuing his brother. Videos from car were mis-labeled and therefore destroyed. Plaintiff could not show bad faith, so no adverse inference instruction.

Nature of Case: civil rights

Electronic Data Involved: Police Car Videos

Keywords: adverse inference; sanctions; bad faith

View Case Opinion

Matthew Enterprise, Inc. v. Chrysler Group LLC, No. 13-cv-04236-BLF (N.D. Cal. May 23, 2016).

May 23 2016

Key Insight: Plaintiff threatened legal action, but failed to have it’s vendor stop automatic deletion and did not preserve recrods when email system changed. Defendant was prejudiced by this spoilation. Court allowed witnesses to testify to spoilation and potential contents of those communications.

Nature of Case: incentive programs and Robinson-Patman Act violations

Electronic Data Involved: internal and external communications

Keywords: spoilation; vendor

View Case Opinion

Tag:FRCP 37(e) Preservation (effective Dec. 1, 2015)