Catagory:Case Summaries

1
R.C. Olmstead, Inc. v. CU Interface, LLC, 606 F.3d 262 (6th Cir. 2010)
2
Maggette v. BL Dev. Corp., 2010 WL 2010816 (N.D. Miss. May 17, 2010)
3
Soileau v. Smith?s True Value & Rental, 40 So.3d 379 (La. Ct. App. 2010)
4
Commonwealth v. Williams, 926 N.E.2d 1162 (Mass. 2010)
5
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 2010 WL 1135781 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2010)
6
Maldonado v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 2010 WL 1980319 (D. Kan. May 18, 2010)
7
MLM Props., LLC v. Country Cas. Ins. Co., 2010 WL 1948609 (D. Or. May 7, 2010)
8
Martinez-Hernandez v. Butterball LLC, 2010 2089251 (E.D.N.C. May 21, 2010)
9
Griffin v. State, 995 A.2d 791(Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2010)
10
Zynga Game Net. v. Williams, 2010 WL 2077191 (N.D. Cal. May 20, 2010)

R.C. Olmstead, Inc. v. CU Interface, LLC, 606 F.3d 262 (6th Cir. 2010)

Key Insight: District court did not abuse its discretion when it denied plaintiff?s motion for spoliation sanctions against remaining defendant where defendant was not responsible for the destruction of the relevant servers and the district court thus ?balanced the lack of any assertion of wrongdoing by [defendant] with the harm caused to [plaintiff?s] claims? and where Ohio law provided a remedy for a party injured by another party?s spoliation of evidence, namely a claim for the tort of spoliation (which plaintiff apparently asserted against the actual spoliating party)

Nature of Case: Copyright/trade secret infringement, intentional spoliation

Electronic Data Involved: Servers containing relevant ESI

Maggette v. BL Dev. Corp., 2010 WL 2010816 (N.D. Miss. May 17, 2010)

Key Insight: For defendant?s egregious discovery violations uncovered with the assistance of a special master, including failing to adequately search for responsive materials and lying to the court about such searching and other, related topics, court indicated likelihood that it would find as a matter of law that an agency relationship existed between the offending defendant and another entity implicated in the underlying accident claims but, recognizing that ?responsibility for punishing BL for its discovery violations lies with the court, rather than the jury? declined to order an adverse inference and instead set the matter for hearing where proper sanctions and the egregious conduct of counsel would be discussed before a final determination was made

Nature of Case: Claims arising from bus accident

Electronic Data Involved: ESI, hard copy

Soileau v. Smith?s True Value & Rental, 40 So.3d 379 (La. Ct. App. 2010)

Key Insight: Appellate court affirmed lower court?s order finding defendants in contempt, ordering their immediate production of outstanding discovery and establishing facts sufficient to satisfy 2 of the 4 elements of plaintiff?s liability claim where defendants failed to timely produce relevant discovery in violation of the trial court?s order and provided no satisfactory explanation for such failure, and where the trial court determined that defendants were ?hiding? discoverable information

Nature of Case: Personal injury resulting from alleged product defect

Electronic Data Involved: ESI, hard copy

Commonwealth v. Williams, 926 N.E.2d 1162 (Mass. 2010)

Key Insight: Where MySpace messages were admitted into evidence upon the testimony of the recipient which established that the messages were sent by someone with access to the alleged sender?s MySpace page but that did not establish the identity of the person who actually sent the communications, appellate court ruled the messages were admitted in error, but that the error did not create a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice; conviction was affirmed

Nature of Case: Appeal of murder conviction

Electronic Data Involved: MySpace messages

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 2010 WL 1135781 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 22, 2010)

Key Insight: Addressing several objections to the magistrate?s order compelling production of data from non-parties, court held that despite ?minimal? showing of relevance, magistrate did not err in ordering production of data where magistrate weighed the relevance of the data against the burden alleged and ordered appropriate steps to reduce the burden, including limiting the review of documents to those hit by a small set of search terms, waiving respondents? obligations to produce a privilege log, and allowing one respondent to search only its central server rather than 75 individual hard drives following that respondents? showing of undue burden; court rejected petitioner?s objections to the measures taken to reduce the non-parties? burdens

Nature of Case: Litigation surround California’s Proposition 8

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Maldonado v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 2010 WL 1980319 (D. Kan. May 18, 2010)

Key Insight: Court denied motion for a protective order preventing disclosure of the video of defendant?s train colliding with plaintiffs? car where defendant?s concerns about video manipulation or commercial exploitation was unwarranted and unsupported by evidence beyond speculation; court ordered production of event recorder data for a relevant time period and, because of the need for proprietary software to analyze the data, ordered defendant to either secure permission for plaintiff to utilize the software independently and produce the data and software outright or make the data and software available at a mutually agreeable time and place for plaintiff?s evaluation

Nature of Case: Claims arising from train vs. car collision

Electronic Data Involved: Video of collision & event recorder data and related software

MLM Props., LLC v. Country Cas. Ins. Co., 2010 WL 1948609 (D. Or. May 7, 2010)

Key Insight: Where the court ordered plaintiffs to pay defendant?s expenses and fees related to a motion for sanctions arising from plaintiff?s delayed production of documents previously characterized as unrecoverable due to a damaged backup tape, court denied motion for additional sanctions where plaintiffs argued no prejudice resulted from the delay and where the court found no evidence to justify sanctions beyond those already imposed

Nature of Case: Breach of insurance contract and intentional inter-ference with economic relationships

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Martinez-Hernandez v. Butterball LLC, 2010 2089251 (E.D.N.C. May 21, 2010)

Key Insight: Where plaintiff?s search requests were unreasonable and unduly burdensome and where defendant?s proposed ESI search could ?be reasonably expanded to search for relevant information without becoming unduly burdensome?, court ordered the parties to continue negotiating to identify 25 agreed upon search terms to search relevant custodians? reasonably accessible data; court found backup tapes ?not readily accessible because of undue burden or cost? and ordered defendant to run the agreed upon search terms ?only on reasonably accessible sources, such as active and archived data of network computers?

Nature of Case: Class action

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Griffin v. State, 995 A.2d 791(Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2010)

Key Insight: Finding ?no reason why social media profiles may not be circumstantially authenticated in the same manner as other forms of electronic content – by their content and context?, court found that a paper copy of a MySpace profile page was properly authenticated by the presence of a photograph of the alleged owner of the profile on the printed page, the presence of unique identifiers such as her date of birth, number of children, and use of the admitted nickname of her boyfriend, ?Boozy?, and by the testimony of an officer that he believed the profile belonged to the alleged owner for the reasons previously listed (presence of unique identifiers, etc.)

Nature of Case: Criminal

Electronic Data Involved: MySpace profile page

Zynga Game Net. v. Williams, 2010 WL 2077191 (N.D. Cal. May 20, 2010)

Key Insight: Court granted motion for leave to serve subpoenas on third parties (GoDaddy, Microsoft Office Live, and PayPal) for purposes of obtaining information sufficient to identify and locate suspected copyright infringers but ordered plaintiff to narrow the scope of the subpoenas for the limited purpose of identification

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Information sufficient to identify suspected defendants

Copyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.