Motion to Compel – Page 132 – Electronic Discovery Law

Samide v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 773 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court modified prior order directing defendants to produce contents of hard drives for in camera inspection; individual defendants now directed to produce hard copies of all emails relating to allegations against certain individual, including any deleted emails recovered by a qualified expert appointed by the referee supervising the discovery; only those emails that in fact deal with relevant allegations to be turned over to the plaintiff; plaintiff agreed to bear all costs related to recovery of data from hard drive

Nature of Case: Sex discrimination, negligent supervision and breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Email and deleted email on hard drives of individual defendants

Ex Parte Wal-Mart, Inc., 809 So.2d 818 (Ala. 2001)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Mandamus relief granted; “run” from database to be narrowed to retrieve only falling-merchandise incidents within geographic and temporal limits set forth by trial court

Nature of Case: Negligence, premises liability

Electronic Data Involved: Run from computer database

Adams v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 54 F.R.D. 220 (W.D. Va. 1972)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of defendant’s current computerized master payroll file and all computer print-outs for W-2 forms of defendant’s employees, given accuracy of records and inexpensiveness of production

Nature of Case: Race discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized master payroll file

Cumis Ins. Co. v. Diebold, Inc., 2004 WL 1126173 (E.D. Pa. May 20, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court ordered defendant to respond to document requests by searching its electronic storage devices and electronic data compilations; plaintiff convinced court that defendant may not have satisfied its discovery obligations by showing that responsive Diebold documents and emails had been obtained from other sources, but had yet to be produced by Diebold itself

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Emails

Grill v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 2004 WL 2314640 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 7, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Finding that work product protection did not apply to contested emails, court ordered their production

Nature of Case: Disabled individual alleged violations of ADA

Electronic Data Involved: Email between plaintiff and third party

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

Dec 01 2004

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

Santiago v. Miles, 121 F.R.D. 636 (W.D.N.Y. 1988)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Motion to compel production of computer printouts denied as to those constituting work product, granted as to those that were not prepared in anticipation of litigation

Nature of Case: Inmates sued for intentional discrimination in assignment of housing, programs, and administration of discipline

Electronic Data Involved: Computer printouts showing analysis of work locations and ethnicity of inmates

Wiginton v. CB Richard Ellis, Inc., 229 F.R.D. 568 (N.D. Ill. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court created its own eight-factor test by adding one more factor to the Zubulake seven-factor test, and determined that cost-shifting was appropriate (responding party 25% and requesting party 75%)

Nature of Case: Sexual harassment

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

Allen v. Armstrong, 2004 WL 1533934 (D. Conn. Apr. 5, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Order memorialized parties’ agreement regarding motion to compel: defendants agreed to produce all emails that exist in printed form, but would not conduct search of electronic database to retrieve emails since it would be cost prohibitive; defendant understood it would be precluded from offering evidence at trial that was not properly disclosed in discovery

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Cummings v. Gen. Motors Corp., 365 F.3d 944 (10th Cir. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny motion to compel access to GM’s databases and grant protective order to GM where plaintiffs’ proposed computer database searches were overly broad in scope, duplicative of prior requests and unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: Database

Tag:Motion to Compel