Fischer v. Forrest (SDNY, 2017)
Key Insight: general objections
Nature of Case: trademark; Lanham Act
Electronic Data Involved: business records
Keywords: the use of boilerplate language in responding to discovery requests violates Rule 34
Redzepagic v. Hammer – Case Opinion (Southern District of New York, 2017)
Key Insight: Sanctions denied against defendant because text messages were available from a different source, sanctions denied against plaintiff because documents were not under plaintiff’s control
Nature of Case: Fair Labor Standards Act (failure to pay overtime wages)
Electronic Data Involved: Text messages
Keywords: FLSA, Sefket, CBA,
Below v. Yokohoma Tire Corp (Western District of Wisconsin, 2017)
Key Insight: Negligence or even gross negligence is not necessarily bad faith and thus not spoliation
Nature of Case: Product liability
Electronic Data Involved: Car electronic data
Keywords: truck, bad faith, salvage yard, spoliation, sword, shield
Air Products v. Wiesemann (D. Del., 2017)
Key Insight: Sanctions not allowed on parties wiping laptops, because they had only been named as search terms after the other party knew that wiping had happened. No sanction for lost emails available from another source. Pure speculation is not enough to find that relevant ESI was destroyed.
Nature of Case: Securities and Commodities litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Computer log info, laptop info
Keywords: spoliation, sanctions, inherent authority
Lombardo v. Government Emps. Ins. Co., No. 3:16cv392/MCR/EMT (N.D. Fla. Feb. 23, 2017).
Key Insight: personnel file related to settlement and claims handling was ordered to be produced with some confidentiality and redactions to protect personal information of adjuster.
Nature of Case: bad faith
Electronic Data Involved: adjusters personnel file
Keywords: personnel file
Diesel Power Source et al. v. Crazy Carl’s Turbos et al., No. 14-826 (D. Utah Feb. 23, 2017)
Key Insight: Plaintiff requested Defendant run 72 “spelling variations” of 5 terms allowed by prior court order. Court denied and allowed 20, but did not apply sanctions yet.
Nature of Case: Libel/Slander
Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI
Keywords: search terms; sanctions; cooperation
Court Grants Motion to Compel Reproduction in Requested Format
Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Assoc. v. California Dept. Educ., No. 2:11-cv-3471 KJM AC, 2017 WL 445722 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2017)
In this case, the court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel production in native format with metadata, including the reproduction of information already produced, where Defendant failed to follow the protocol set forth in Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b) and unilaterally produced in “’load file’ format.”
Blasi v. United Debt Services (Souther District Ohio, Eastern Division, 2017)
Key Insight: Party that does not dispute it spoliated ESI should be sanctioned
Nature of Case: consumer protection class action
Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records
Keywords: spoliation sanctions, deleted electronic records
Oppenheimer v. City of La Habra (Central District of California, Southern Division, 2017)
Key Insight: Rule 37 does not directly address destruction of video footage.
Nature of Case: prisoner suicide
Electronic Data Involved: video footage, emails, text messages
Keywords: destruction video, spoliation video
Excel Enterprises, LLC v. Winona PVD Coatings, LLC, No. 3:16-cv-19-WCL-MGG (N.D. Ind. Feb. 17, 2017)
Key Insight: Defendant produced in format requested by Plaintiff. Plaintiff filed motion to compel on grounds documents not matched up to requests. Due to burden on Defendant and lack of prejudice to Plaintiff, Defendant not required to change format of production.
Nature of Case: Breach of Contract
Electronic Data Involved: ESI Production
Keywords: Format; ordinary course of business