Lack of Cooperation / Inaccurate Representations – Page 52

Ryan v. Staten Island Univ. Hosp., 2006 WL 3497875 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Where defendant failed to timely disclose that it was withholding certain information from production and defense counsel made representations several times to plaintiff and to court that she had provided full and complete discovery, court: (1) granted motion to compel production of database in hard copy and in electronic form with specific redactions noted and included in revised privilege log; (2) extended discovery cut-off date; and (3) awarded sanctions solely against defense counsel (and not client) for costs of motion

Nature of Case: Fraud and medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: Database

Cornell Research Found., Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 2006 WL 5097357 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Court found that litigation tactic employed by HP, in making such an extraordinary voluminous, twelfth hour production, was “disturbing,” but denied plaintiffs’ request that HP prepare a detailed index of material produced since it would be unduly harsh and potentially intrusive on attorney work product; court instead invited plaintiffs to seek additional, limited discovery if appropriate and noted tactic might be relevant to court’s declaring the lawsuit an exceptional case for purposes of awarding attorneys’ fees and costs in the event plaintiffs’ infringement claims were successful

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Over 38 gigabytes of ESI produced late in discovery

Kemper Mortgage, Inc. v. Russell, 2006 WL 4968120 (S.D. Ohio May 4, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Where plaintiff presented convincing evidence at preliminary injunction hearing of defendant’s intentional spoliation of evidence, including his installation of file ?shredder? program on laptop computer the day before litigation was filed and under threat of its commencement, court allowed inference that that considerably more evidence of misconduct would have been found without the spoliation and granted preliminary injunction barring defendant from, among other things, destroying or deleting relevant ESI

Nature of Case: Breach of employment agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop computer

Optowave Co., Ltd. v. Nikitin, 2006 WL 3231422 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 7, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Where, despite repeated warnings not to destroy relevant evidence, defendant allowed another party to reformat hard drives of his employees’ computers without first preserving relevant files contained on computers to be reformatted, resulting in loss of crucial electronic evidence, court found that adverse inference instruction was appropriate sanction

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Email and customer files

Leon v. IDX Sys. Corp., 2004 WL 5571412 (W.D. Wash. Sept. 30, 2004), affirmed, 464 F.3d 951 (9th Cir. 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Where plaintiff deleted whole directories without looking at their contents and designed drive wiping program to write over data indiscriminately after he had notice of the pendency of the litigation, court concluded that ?the extreme nature? of plaintiff?s bad faith behavior, combined with harm done to defendants, merited dismissal of plaintiff?s claims with prejudice; court further ordered plaintiff to pay defendants $65,000 to reimburse them for expenses incurred in investigating and litigating spoliation issue

Nature of Case: Retaliation under False Claims Act and other federal statutes, and Washington state law claims

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

Barker Capital LLC v. Rebus LLC, 2006 WL 247114 (Del. Super. Ct. Jan. 12, 2006) (Unpublished)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Court directed plaintiff’s counsel to submit an affidavit re attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in connection with certain depositions and three motions to compel, where defendants produced certain corporate minutes and other documents after the close of discovery, and where defendants had failed to produce emails and other electronic documents from all available sources despite their general counsel’s earlier affidavit to the contrary

Electronic Data Involved: Emails and other electronic documents

Pioneer Res. Corp. v. Nami Res.Co., LLC, 2006 WL 1635651 (E.D. Ky. June 8, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Defendant ordered to make good faith effort to locate responsive emails that were discussed at deposition; if defendant claims that such documents cannot be retrieved, defendant must file a written statement indicating all steps taken to obtain said emails and explain in detail why they could not be retrieved; defendant further warned that failure to comply could result in sanctions being imposed

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Waltzer v. Tradescape & Co., L.L.C., 819 N.Y.S.2d 38 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Defendants’ failure to comply with six separate court orders to produce personal documents and electronic documents in the possession of two law firms that had formerly represented defendants, coupled with inadequate excuses for those defaults, warranted striking of their answer

Electronic Data Involved: CDs containing electronic documents

Ferrero v. Henderson, 341 F.Supp.2d 873 (S.D. Ohio 2004), opinion withdrawn in part on reconsideration, 2005 WL 1802134 (S.D. Ohio July 28, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Although plaintiff was unable to make out FMLA claim, court sanctioned defendant under Rule 26(g)(3) for failure to timely produce dispositive payroll data, and ordered it to pay plaintiff the reasonable attorney fees and expenses incurred in prosecuting FMLA claim, including but not limited to the time her attorney spent in pretrial preparation of the claim and in prosecuting the claim at trial

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination, FMLA claim

Electronic Data Involved: Payroll data

United States v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 374 F.3d 281 (5th Cir. 2004), rev’d, 125 S.Ct. 2129 (2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Conviction of Arthur Anderson for obstructing an official proceeding of the SEC affirmed; conviction was based on government’s allegations that, in order to protect the firm and the firm’s largest single account (Enron), Anderson ordered a mass destruction of documents to keep them from the hands of the SEC; Anderson unsuccessfully attempted to cloak the destruction of documents under the auspices of its document retention policies

Nature of Case: Criminal charge of obstructing an official proceeding of the SEC

Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard copy documents

Tag:Lack of Cooperation / Inaccurate Representations