Tag:Motion to Compel

1
In re Amsted Ind., Inc. ERISA Litig., 2002 WL 31844956 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 18, 2002)
2
Dikeman v. Mary A. Stearns, P.C., 560 S.E.2d 115 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)
3
Hollingsworth v. Time Warner Cable, 812 N.E.2d 976 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
4
Momah v. Albert Einstein Med. Center, 164 F.R.D. 412 (E.D. Pa. 1996)
5
Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 2004 WL 764085 (D. Kan. Apr. 8, 2004)
6
Wright v. AmSouth Bancorporation, 320 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2003)
7
Anderson v. Crossroads Capital Partners, LLC, 2004 WL 256512 (D. Minn. Feb. 10, 2004)
8
Dow Chem. Co. v. Allen, 672 F.2d 1262 (7th Cir. 1982)
9
Itzenson v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 2000 WL 1507422 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 10, 2000)
10
Murlas Living Trust v. Mobil Oil Corp., 1995 WL 124186 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 20, 1999)

In re Amsted Ind., Inc. ERISA Litig., 2002 WL 31844956 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 18, 2002)

Key Insight: Plaintiffs’ motion to retrieve email granted; defendants required to re-search backup tapes using broader subject matter and time period, and to search email folders of any relevant individual in same manner

Nature of Case: ESOP plan participants sued employer and ESOP for breach of fiduciary duty and other wrongs

Electronic Data Involved: Email and other computerized data

Dikeman v. Mary A. Stearns, P.C., 560 S.E.2d 115 (Ga. Ct. App. 2002)

Key Insight: Former client’s discovery requests, including request for hard drives of lawyer’s computers that had generated documents pertaining to client, were overbroad, oppressive and annoying

Nature of Case: Fee dispute between lawyer and former client

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive

Hollingsworth v. Time Warner Cable, 812 N.E.2d 976 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendant voluntarily divulged a privileged email communication at unemployment hearing and in response to discovery request, defendant waived any privilege with respect to the communication and to testimony and documents regarding the same subject matter; trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion for return of the communication and for protective order, and in denying plaintiff’s motion to compel

Nature of Case: Wrongful discharge

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 2004 WL 764085 (D. Kan. Apr. 8, 2004)

Key Insight: Defendant’s response to (overbroad) document request, which directed requesting party to defendant’s web site where relevant HR policies and a particular employee handbook could be retrieved, was not insufficient response; court narrowed request and ordered production of any additional documents within 20 days; no sanctions warranted

Nature of Case: Former employee alleged violations of free speech, due process and gender discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic HR policies and manuals

Wright v. AmSouth Bancorporation, 320 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2003)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of “computer diskette or tape copy of all word processing files created, modified and/or access by, or on behalf” of five employees over 2-1/2 year period as overbroad and unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Age discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Word processing files

Anderson v. Crossroads Capital Partners, LLC, 2004 WL 256512 (D. Minn. Feb. 10, 2004)

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s use of Cyberscrub data wiping software prior to court-ordered inspection of her computer and after agreeing on the record that she would not purge her hard drive or delete any documents, and her misrepresentations about age of hard drive, were not sufficiently egregious to warrant dismissal but did warrant an adverse inference instruction

Nature of Case: Sexual harassment and whistleblower claims by former employee

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive of plaintiff’s personal computer

Itzenson v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 2000 WL 1507422 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 10, 2000)

Key Insight: Discovery deadline extended and defendant ordered to “use every practicable means” to identify requested claims files; if defendant truly cannot segregate the claim files, defendant would be directed to make available a representative with requisite knowledge and skill to assist plaintiff’s representative in reviewing and identifying as promptly as possible each unsegregated file which met plaintiff’s criteria

Nature of Case: ERISA action to recover death benefits under employee benefit plan

Electronic Data Involved: Database re insurance claims

Murlas Living Trust v. Mobil Oil Corp., 1995 WL 124186 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 20, 1999)

Key Insight: Defendant not required to produce entire database; defendant ordered to re-search database for information relevant to subject property and if further information found, to produce it

Nature of Case: Lessor sued for contract breach and related claims stemming from leaking underground storage tank

Electronic Data Involved: Database containing information re facilities with leaking underground storage tanks

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