Catagory:Case Summaries

1
Jimena v. UBS AG Bank, Inc., No. 1:07-cv-00367 OWW SKO, 2011 WL 2551413 (E.D. Cal. June 27, 2011)
2
Britton v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., No. 4:11cv32-RH/WCS, 2011 WL 3236189 (N.D. Fla. June 8, 2011)
3
People v. Saibu, D054980, 2011 WL 73314 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)
4
In re Google Litig., No. C 08-03172 RMW (PSG), 2011 WL 6113000 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 7, 2011)
5
Hansen v. Chevron USA, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-00959-TS-DN, 2011 WL 2149770 (D. Utah May 31, 2011)
6
Specht v. Google, Inc., No. 09 C 2572, 2011 WL 2565666 (N.D. Ill. June 27, 2011)
7
Alers v. City of Philadelphia, No. 08-4745, 2011 WL 6000602 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 29, 2011)
8
Seyler v. T-Sys. N. Amer., Inc., 2011 WL 196920 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2011)
9
ANZ Advanced Techs., LLC v. Bush Hog, LLC, 2011 WL 814463 (S.D. Ala. Jan. 26, 2011)
10
United States v. Hamilton, No. 2:11CR13-HEH, 2011 WL 1366481 (E.D. Va. Apr. 11, 2011)

Jimena v. UBS AG Bank, Inc., No. 1:07-cv-00367 OWW SKO, 2011 WL 2551413 (E.D. Cal. June 27, 2011)

Key Insight: Court found plaintiff failed to properly authenticate emails allegedly sent to him by Clive Standish pursuant to either Evidence Rule 901(b)(1), permitting authentication through the testimony of a witness with personal knowledge, or Rule 901(b)(4) which allows authentication by appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics taken in conjunction with circumstances and, absent admissible evidence to create a triable issue of material fact, granted defendant?s motion for summary judgment

Nature of Case: Fraud

Electronic Data Involved: Emails

Britton v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., No. 4:11cv32-RH/WCS, 2011 WL 3236189 (N.D. Fla. June 8, 2011)

Key Insight: Where defendant?s employee(s) were found to have allowed the loss of relevant video surveillance tape, despite repeated notification of its relevance and requests for preservation, and to have done so intentionally and in bad faith, court declined to enter default judgment but precluded defendant?s presentation of certain defenses and ordered payment of attorney?s costs and fees related to the motion for sanctions and payment of half of such costs and fees related to a prior motion in which defendant?s dishonesty regarding the existence of the at issue vide resulted in costs to the plaintiffs

Nature of Case: Claims arising from alleged wrongful detention of teens for shoplifting

Electronic Data Involved: Video surveillance

People v. Saibu, D054980, 2011 WL 73314 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)

Key Insight: Where trial court admitted enhanced digital photos despite prosecution?s failure to disclose that the photograph had been enhanced, or how , but offered defendant an opportunity to remedy the prejudice and locate an opposing expert, appellate court found no abuse of discretion; appellate court found no error in trial court?s failure to require a Kelly hearing with respect to the enhancement techniques where it was ?questionable? whether the Photoshop program used could be considered a scientific technique and where the expert testified that he had been using Photoshop since for 8 years, that it was ?widely available? and ?considered an essential tool? and where an appellate court in Washington had previously determined that the enhancement of latent prints with Photoshop was ?generally accepted in the relevant scientific community?; foundation was properly laid for admission of photos where expert testified as to how they were created and where ?other witnesses? testified that the surveillance video (from which still photos were taken) accurately depicted the events they had witnessed

Nature of Case: Robbery, murder

Electronic Data Involved: Enhanced digital photo

In re Google Litig., No. C 08-03172 RMW (PSG), 2011 WL 6113000 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 7, 2011)

Key Insight: Where third party objected to plaintiff?s subpoena as overly broad and burdensome but nevertheless undertook a limited search which resulted in the identification of zero documents, but where plaintiff argued the search was halfhearted and that additional searching was required, the court took notice of objective of the recently adopted Model Order on E-Discovery in Patent Cases and indicated its applicability to third parties and thereafter ordered plaintiff to provide the non-party with five search terms to be utilized in additional searching and that plaintiff would bear the costs of any terms beyond the limits agreed to by the parties or granted by the court

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Hansen v. Chevron USA, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-00959-TS-DN, 2011 WL 2149770 (D. Utah May 31, 2011)

Key Insight: Court denied motion to compel forensic imaging of laptop containing responsive information where plaintiff did not elaborate on the ?need? for such imaging but rather just asked for it, where defendant offered to produce the relevant information from the laptop on a thumb drive, and where defendant indicated that the laptop contained both confidential and personal information

Specht v. Google, Inc., No. 09 C 2572, 2011 WL 2565666 (N.D. Ill. June 27, 2011)

Key Insight: Acknowledging that expenses related to imaging and creating electronic versions of documents are taxable when the parties have agreed to produce documents electronically, the court denied defendant?s request for recovery of such funds absent evidence that the parties agreed to electronic production; court denied recovery of expenditure for converting plaintiff?s QuickBooks database into a usable format because such costs are not recoverable

Electronic Data Involved: ESI, QuickBooks database

Alers v. City of Philadelphia, No. 08-4745, 2011 WL 6000602 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 29, 2011)

Key Insight: Where defendants inadvertently produced a privileged memorandum as part of a multi-page document amid more than 2000 pages of document production and where they requested return of the document four days after learning of its disclosure at a deposition (where there was no objection made), the court found that privilege was not waived (despite defendants? choice to attach the memorandum to a publically available motion)

Electronic Data Involved: Inadvertently produced memorandum

Seyler v. T-Sys. N. Amer., Inc., 2011 WL 196920 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2011)

Key Insight: Court found no waiver of plaintiff?s claims of privilege resulting from the production of one privileged email where, pursuant to FRE 502(a) the waiver was not intentional as established by the sworn statement of plaintiff?s counsel that he was not aware that the plaintiff?s sister, the other party to the relevant email, was an attorney

Nature of Case: Hostile work environment, retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress

Electronic Data Involved: Privileged email

ANZ Advanced Techs., LLC v. Bush Hog, LLC, 2011 WL 814463 (S.D. Ala. Jan. 26, 2011)

Key Insight: Where plaintiffs admitted to fabricating evidence and failed to comply with court orders to produce certain hard drives and other data storage and instead argued, among other things, that the hard drives etc. were in possession of an unrelated foreign corporation (ANZ International) and that ANZ USA was not involved in the discovery violations (including the fabrication of evidence), the court rejected such arguments upon establishing the connection between ANZ Int. and ANZ USA and ordered that plaintiffs? claims be dismissed

Nature of Case: Contract dispute

Electronic Data Involved: Fabricated evidence, hard drives, other storage devices

United States v. Hamilton, No. 2:11CR13-HEH, 2011 WL 1366481 (E.D. Va. Apr. 11, 2011)

Key Insight: Employer?s policy notifying employees that there should be no expectation of privacy as to information ?sent, received, accessed, or stored? on work computer served to negate reasonable expectation of privacy for purposes of fourth amendment and to negate marital privilege as to emails stored on employee?s computer, even where those emails were sent at a time when no use policy was in place

Nature of Case: Criminal indictment

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.