Catagory:Case Summaries

1
NY Machinery Inc., et al. v. The Korean Cleaners Monthly, et al (District of New Jersey, 2020)
2
Kamuda v. Sterigenics U.S. LLC (Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois, 2020)
3
Healthplan Serv., Inc. v. Dixit, et al (M.D. Florida, 2019)
4
D.M. v. Wesley Med. Ctr. LLC (D. Kan, 2019)
5
Center for Auto Safety et al. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Arizona Court of Appeals, 2019)
6
Commonwealth v. Davis (PA Supreme Court, 2019)
7
United States v. Beverly (Fifth Circuit, 2019)
8
Forney v. Grand Island Chiropractic, P.C. (WDNY, 2019)
9
Estate of Felipe A. Radelat (Tex. App., 2019)
10
Grey Oaks Country Club, Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., No. 2:18-cv-639-FtM-99NPM (M.D. Fla., 2019)

NY Machinery Inc., et al. v. The Korean Cleaners Monthly, et al (District of New Jersey, 2020)

Key Insight: who bears the burden of paying for translation of foreign language documents

Nature of Case: unfair competition, false advertising, defamation, false light, trade libel, and tortious interference

Electronic Data Involved: foreign language documents

Keywords: foreign language, translation, machine translation, burden to pay

View Case Opinion

Kamuda v. Sterigenics U.S. LLC (Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois, 2020)

Key Insight: whether a request for a specific format is an undue burden

Nature of Case:

Electronic Data Involved: documents produced in TIFF format versus native format

Keywords: undue burden, TIFF, native, cybersecurity

Identified State Rule(s): 214(b)

View Case Opinion

D.M. v. Wesley Med. Ctr. LLC (D. Kan, 2019)

Key Insight: Privileged docs based on only state law must be produced in a case with both federal and state claims

Nature of Case: Medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: Responsive documents

Keywords: Privilege, state law

Identified State Rule(s): K.S.A. section 65-4925(a)

Identified Federal Rule(s): FRCP 26(b)

View Case Opinion

Center for Auto Safety et al. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Arizona Court of Appeals, 2019)

Key Insight: defendants perpetrated fraud and acted in bad faith when not disclosing test results of defective product

Nature of Case: product liability

Electronic Data Involved: product test results that were not disclosed

Keywords: fraud, bad faith, disclosure, confidentiality

Identified Local Court Rule(s): Maricopa county local practice rule 2.19, 5.4

Identified State Rule(s): 26(c)(1), 26(c)(1)(G), 26(c)(4)(A)

View Case Opinion

Commonwealth v. Davis (PA Supreme Court, 2019)

Key Insight: computer passwords/access, act of production

Nature of Case: Fifth Amendment violation (Criminal)

Electronic Data Involved: computer files

Keywords: “foregone conclusion” exception, password, search warrant, encryption, testimonial in nature, compulsion of mental processes

Identified State Rule(s): Pa.R.A.P. 313(b)

Estate of Felipe A. Radelat (Tex. App., 2019)

Key Insight: Sanctions, Efforts to Thwart discovery, Fraudulent Concealment

Nature of Case: Estates and Trusts

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy

Keywords: fraudulent concealment, Statute of Limitations, Sanctions, Violation of Court Orders, Failure to produce, Death Penalty sanction, Obstruction, Temporary injunction, Deception of the Court

Identified State Rule(s): Tex. R. Civ. P. 199.3; Tex.R. Civ. P. 176 .8 (a)

Grey Oaks Country Club, Inc. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., No. 2:18-cv-639-FtM-99NPM (M.D. Fla., 2019)

Key Insight: Plaintiff claimed Defendant had not fully compensated for loses. Defendant claimed all monies owed under insurance contract had been paid. When discovery still remains on issues on summary judgment, summary judgment is premature.

Nature of Case: Insurance Coverage Dispute

Electronic Data Involved: Various discovery responses related to damage amounts

Keywords: summary judgment

View Case Opinion

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