Archive - 2017

1
“No Harm, No Foul”: Court Denies Motion for Spoliation Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 37(e)
2
Mueller v. Swift, No. 1:15-cv-01974-WJM-KLM (July 19, 2017)
3
T.D.P. v. City of Oakland (Northern District California, San Francisco Division, 2017)
4
Ariel Inv., LLC v. Ariel Capital Advisors LLC, No. 15 C 3717 (N.D. Ill., July 17, 2017)
5
The ABA Journal’s Web 100 – Nominate Your Favorites!
6
Borum v. Smith, No. 17-CV-00017-JHM, 2017 WL 3014487 (W.D. Ky. July 14, 2017)
7
Williams v. Superior Court (California Supreme Court, 2017)
8
Ottoson v. SMBC Leasing (S.D.N.Y., 2017)
9
Snider v. Danfoss (Northern District of Illinois, 2017)
10
Nachurs Alpine Solutions, Corp. v. Banks and Nutra-Flo Co., No. 5:15-CV-04015-LTS-CJW (N.D. Iowa July 7, 2017)

“No Harm, No Foul”: Court Denies Motion for Spoliation Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 37(e)

Snider v. Danfoss, LLC, 15 CV 4748, 2017 WL 2973464 (N.D. Ill. July 12, 2017)

In this case, the court addressed Plaintiff’s request for sanctions for Defendant’s failure to preserve emails and, concluding the information did “not appear to be relevant” and that Plaintiff was not prejudiced, denied Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions:

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) incorporates the long-standing legal principle embodied in the phrase used on basketball courts everyday across the country: “No harm; no foul.” Under the particular facts of this case, Defendant’s admitted and erroneous destruction of electronically stored information (ESI), which does not appear to be relevant, has not prejudiced Plaintiff. Accordingly, sanctions are not warranted under Rule 37(e).

Read More

Mueller v. Swift, No. 1:15-cv-01974-WJM-KLM (July 19, 2017)

Key Insight: Sanction must be proportional to loss, loss was mitigated by testimony about the contents and other notes

Nature of Case: Tortious interference, assault, battery

Electronic Data Involved: Audio recording

Keywords: Taylor Swift, audio recording, KYGO, radio, meet and greet

View Case Opinion

T.D.P. v. City of Oakland (Northern District California, San Francisco Division, 2017)

Key Insight: Keyword searching alone may not be sufficient and can be aided by strategies like predictive coding

Nature of Case: civil rights, fourth amendment

Electronic Data Involved: text messages, social media posts

Keywords: keyword searching, predictive coding

View Case Opinion

Ariel Inv., LLC v. Ariel Capital Advisors LLC, No. 15 C 3717 (N.D. Ill., July 17, 2017)

Key Insight: Reimbursement of eDiscovery costs

Nature of Case: trademark infringement, unfair competition, cybersquatting

Electronic Data Involved: documents copied and coverted into a readable format

Keywords: Reimbursement, making copies, converted, copied, native, proportionality, taxable

View Case Opinion

The ABA Journal’s Web 100 – Nominate Your Favorites!

Dear Readers,

It is our pleasure to provide you with regular summaries of important and interesting e-Discovery opinions and other e-Discovery resources. We hope you enjoy them.  If you do, please consider nominating us for the ABA Journal’s Web 100 – a celebration of the “best of the legal industry on the web.”  Nominations are due no later than 11:50 p.m. CT on Sunday, July 30, 2017 and can be made by filling out the nomination form, available here.

Thanks for your interest in our blog!

Sincerely,

The K&L Gates Electronic Discovery Law Blog Team

Borum v. Smith, No. 17-CV-00017-JHM, 2017 WL 3014487 (W.D. Ky. July 14, 2017)

Key Insight: mere statement that disclosure would provide competitors with advantage doesn’t satisfy elements of trade secret.

Nature of Case: medical negligence

Electronic Data Involved: electronic health record (EHR) system

Keywords: confidential and proprietary trade secrets, protective order

View Case Opinion

Williams v. Superior Court (California Supreme Court, 2017)

Key Insight: Showing threshold of compelling interest unnecessary before nonparty contact information is discoverable

Nature of Case: Wage and hour class action

Electronic Data Involved: nonparty contact information

Keywords: third party privacy, class action, percipient witness, discovery threshold, threshold requirement

Identified State Rule(s): Cal. Civ. Proc. 2017.010, 1017.020, 2030.300

View Case Opinion

Ottoson v. SMBC Leasing (S.D.N.Y., 2017)

Key Insight: whether adverse inference is warranted

Nature of Case: workplace discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: text messages, email

Keywords: relevance, prejudice, obligation to preserve, intent to deprive, gross negligence, inherent authority, sanctions, spoliation, fees, costs, adverse inference, bad faith, willfully

View Case Opinion

Snider v. Danfoss (Northern District of Illinois, 2017)

Key Insight: Despite lack of sanctions due to the evidence being available in other ways, automatic deletion of emails is not best practice.

Nature of Case: Sexual harassment

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted Emails

Keywords: Automatic deletion, Susan Blood,

View Case Opinion

Nachurs Alpine Solutions, Corp. v. Banks and Nutra-Flo Co., No. 5:15-CV-04015-LTS-CJW (N.D. Iowa July 7, 2017)

Key Insight: Production of non-responsive documents for re-review due to distrust may be cost shifted to opposing party

Nature of Case: Trade secret

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents

Keywords: fertilizer, trade secret, Nutra-Flo,

View Case Opinion

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