Tag:Inspection

1
McCurdy Group, LLC v. Am. Biomedical Group, Inc., 9 Fed. Appx. 822, 2001 WL 536974 (10th Cir. May 21, 2001)
2
Med. Billing Consultants, Inc. v. Intelligent Med. Objects, Inc., 2003 WL 1809465 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 4, 2003)
3
Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)
4
In re Pharmatrak, Inc. Privacy Litig., 292 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D. Mass. 2003)
5
QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)
6
RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)
7
In re Search of 3817 W. West End, 321 F. Supp. 2d 953 (N.D. Ill. 2004)
8
Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 948 F. Supp. 923 (N.D. Cal. 1996)
9
S. Diagnostic Assoc. v. Bencosme, 833 So.2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
10
Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 669 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

McCurdy Group, LLC v. Am. Biomedical Group, Inc., 9 Fed. Appx. 822, 2001 WL 536974 (10th Cir. May 21, 2001)

Key Insight: Defendant’s skepticism that plaintiff had not produced copies of all responsive documents did not entitle defendant to conduct physical inspection of plaintiff’s hard drives

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and quantum meruit claim

Electronic Data Involved: Computer and disc drives

Med. Billing Consultants, Inc. v. Intelligent Med. Objects, Inc., 2003 WL 1809465 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 4, 2003)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel defendants to allow experts to perform physical inspection of their computer equipment and files, since full disclosure of email had been provided by defendants and inspection was likely to be unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Defendant’s computer equipment and files

Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Petition for writ of mandate denied; based on evidence that a business computer was used for accounting and nothing else, and that there was a risk the hard drive might be purged, trial court acted properly when it ordered the petitioner to produce the computer’s hard drive

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of funds

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive

In re Pharmatrak, Inc. Privacy Litig., 292 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D. Mass. 2003)

Key Insight: Granting summary judgment for defendants, court noted that pursuant to an earlier order, plaintiffs’ expert was given unrestricted access to the hard drives of Pharmatrak’s computer servers over one-month period, and stated that plaintiffs characterization of its expert’s search of Pharmatrak’s computer servers as a “partial” inspection was unsupported by the record and failed to raise an issue of fact

Nature of Case: Class action alleging that defendants secretly intercepted and accessed plaintiffs’ personal information and browsing habits through unlawful use of cookies and other devices

Electronic Data Involved: Inspection of computer servers

QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion for trial court to strike defendant’s answer and enter judgment for plaintiff on issue of liability, where defendant reformatted computer’s hard drive, effectively erasing any information the computer may have contained, a day before surrendering it for court-ordered inspection

Nature of Case: Dispute between former business partners

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)

Key Insight: Court granted emergency motion to compel, requiring defendants to appear for deposition and produce computers for inspection by plaintiff’s computer forensics expert; at subsequent bench trial, in light of defendants’ deletion of data from computers after litigation commenced, repeated defragmentation of hard drives prior to court-ordered inspections, and decision not to offer any testimony to explain same, court drew adverse inference; court awarded plaintiff $100,000 as royalty for defendants’ unauthorized use of trade secrets, and $150,000 in punitive damages for the willful and malicious misappropriation of trade secrets and attempted cover-up

Nature of Case: Manufacturer sued former employee and competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Software and databases containing sales and customer information

Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. MAPHIA, 948 F. Supp. 923 (N.D. Cal. 1996)

Key Insight: Brief reference to court’s granting plaintiff’s requested ex parte TRO and seizure order to seize computers and hardware, copy memory, and delete pirated software before returning items to defendant

Nature of Case: Copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives and memory devices (video game software)

S. Diagnostic Assoc. v. Bencosme, 833 So.2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Key Insight: Appellate court granted writ and quashed trial court’s order granting party’s motion for leave to inspect non-party’s computer system; remanded with directions to trial court to craft a narrowly-tailored order that sets parameters and limitations on the inspection

Nature of Case: Insurance bad faith

Electronic Data Involved: Computer system; records of payments to physicians

Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 669 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Key Insight: Order allowing plaintiff unrestricted access to defendant’s computer system quashed, because the order allowed plaintiff unrestricted access to defendant’s computer system, including all of his programs and directories, without protection for any privileged or confidential information and without safeguards or restrictions to minimize any potential harm to the computer system

Nature of Case: Breach of contract suit between former partners

Electronic Data Involved: Inspection of computer system to search for financial information

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