Archive - December 1, 2004

1
Itzenson v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 2000 WL 1507422 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 10, 2000)
2
Invision Media Communications, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 2004 WL 396037 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2004)
3
Inst. for Motivational Living, Inc. v. Doulos Inst. for Strategic Consulting, Inc., 2004 WL 2241745 (3rd Cir. Oct. 5, 2004) (Unpublished)
4
Ill. Tool Works, Inc. v. Metro Mark Prods., Ltd., 43 F. Supp. 2d 951 (N.D. Ill. 1999)
5
Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)
6
Hollingsworth v. Time Warner Cable, 812 N.E.2d 976 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004)
7
Hines v. Widnall, 183 F.R.D. 596 (N.D. Fla. 1998)
8
Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
9
Hester v. Bayer Corp., 206 F.R.D. 683 (M.D. Ala. 2001)
10
In re Heritage Bond Litig., 223 F.R.D. 527 (C.D.Cal. 2004)

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

Invision Media Communications, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 2004 WL 396037 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2004)

Key Insight: Plaintiff?s discovery misconduct, including disregard of discovery obligations, misleading statements regarding existence and location of evidence and failure to make reasonable inquiries, warranted sanctions in the form of costs and reasonable attorneys? fees expended by defendant in connection with sanctions motion and certain discovery events

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard drives

Inst. for Motivational Living, Inc. v. Doulos Inst. for Strategic Consulting, Inc., 2004 WL 2241745 (3rd Cir. Oct. 5, 2004) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Appellate court ruled that trial court did not err in awarding sanctions and finding defendant in civil contempt where, moments before he signed settlement agreement and in violation of discovery preservation order, defendant deleted files from laptop that was to be returned to plaintiff; however, case would be remanded so that trial court could determine what amount of attorneys’ fees fairly reflect compensation for defendant’s contumacious conduct

Nature of Case: Copyright and trademark infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Files stored on laptop computer

Ill. Tool Works, Inc. v. Metro Mark Prods., Ltd., 43 F. Supp. 2d 951 (N.D. Ill. 1999)

Key Insight: Defendant’s failure to preserve integrity of computer (dropping it repeatedly and apparent tampering, including disconnecting internal cables prior to court-ordered inspection) and failure to produce responsive electronic material warranted monetary sanctions

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive, deleted files, electronically stored invoices

Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)

Key Insight: In light of defendant’s previous attempt to delete incriminating email and documents from his company laptop, court entered order requiring all parties to preserve and protect evidence

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of corporate opportunity and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents and mail

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

Hines v. Widnall, 183 F.R.D. 596 (N.D. Fla. 1998)

Key Insight: Granting plaintiff’s’ motion to compel production of computerized images of employment records which were created to facilitate review of the documents by geographically-dispersed defense counsel, court held that images did not constitute attorney work product since images did not contain mental impressions or legal theories and would not give plaintiffs insight into defense strategy or opinions; plaintiffs to pay only nominal copying costs and not portion of $250,000 imaging cost incurred by defendant

Nature of Case: Race discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized images of employment records

Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

Key Insight: Failure to preserve certain computer hard drives did not warrant sanctions where there was no reasonable possibility that the missing hard drives (which were obtained after protective order was issued) contained evidence of the theft of trade secret information

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives

Hester v. Bayer Corp., 206 F.R.D. 683 (M.D. Ala. 2001)

Key Insight: After case was removed to federal court, defendant obtained order vacating state court’s entry of ex parte preservation order requiring defendant to “suspend all routine destruction of documents, including but not limited to, recycling back-up tapes, automated deletion of e-mail, and reformatting hard drives,” compliance with which defendant estimated to cost $50,000/month

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: Documents and information in paper or electronic format

In re Heritage Bond Litig., 223 F.R.D. 527 (C.D.Cal. 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendants “deliberately and willfully” failed to produce responsive documents, court concluded that defendants had not substantially complied with its prior discovery order and awarded civil contempt sanctions against defendants in the amount of plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs

Nature of Case: Securities litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Documents on individual defendant’s personal computer

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.