Key Insight: Court denied defendants’ FRCP 60(b) motion for relief from discovery orders, and ordered defendants to comply with prior orders and, among other things, produce certain database in native format, and produce requested email and Excel spreadsheet
Nature of Case: Class action brought by farm workers
Electronic Data Involved: Database, email and spreadsheet
Key Insight: Ruling on plaintiff’s motion to compel, court expressed dismay that parties had not addressed discovery of ESI given FRCP e-discovery amendments and fact that much of the evidence was in electronic format; court ordered parties to personally meet and confer to discuss a discovery plan addressing, among other things, electronic discovery, modifications to the Federal Rules, depositions, and the like, and lodge the proposed discovery plan by certain date
Nature of Case: Individual and class action alleging labor abuses
Electronic Data Involved: Sales information, employee information
Key Insight: Where defendant had produced requested work orders in .pdf format and then in other electronic formats in attempts to resolve plaintiff’s complaints, court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel and for sanctions since plaintiff could not show that production request called for any specific format and court could not conclude that defendant had failed to meet such request
Nature of Case: Employment discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: Work orders
Key Insight: District court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to impose spoliation sanctions against defendant university for deletion of former teaching assistant’s email account, where university backed-up the contents of the account onto two CDs before deleting it, and the deletion occurred before the lawsuit was filed
Nature of Case: Employment discrimination, civil rights
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Where plaintiff contended that defendant had not thoroughly searched its electronic storage network or devices for relevant documents, court denied plaintiff?s request to compel defendant to conduct and document a further comprehensive search since plaintiff failed to cite authority for proposition that court should enforce plaintiff?s subjective notion of how defendant should conduct discovery: ?Defendant is under a duty to produce all relevant documents. Defendant is not under a duty to comply with every discovery procedure requested by Plaintiff.?
Nature of Case: Wrongful discharge
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents
Key Insight: Court approved plaintiff’s fee petition and awarded $79,606 in attorneys’ fees and $19,856 in expenses, for a total of $99,462, as sanction for defendant’s intentional destruction of laptop computer
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and breach of employment contract
Electronic Data Involved: Computer
Key Insight: Where former employee admitted using file shredder program on his NSA-issued laptop before returning it, and evidence showed use of file shredder program on competitor-issued laptop computer, court found defendants? conduct was ?egregious? and amounted to spoliation but denied plaintiff?s request for entry of default judgment; court instead ordered production of computer hard drive for further examination, dismissed defendants? counterclaims, and ordered defendants to pay attorneys? fees and expenses incurred as a result of defendants? misconduct
Nature of Case: Seller of computer hardware and software sued former employee and competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition and related claims
Electronic Data Involved: Laptop computers
Key Insight: Court approved Trustee?s request for permission to pay computer forensics expert $70,000 as a necessary cost and expense of preserving the estate, where recovery of deleted electronic information was necessary to enable Trustee to locate and administer valuable assets of estate and to understand debtor’s prepetition transactions, and where expert?s services provided a concrete benefit for the estate since approximately $400,000 in assets was recovered by Trustee as a result
Nature of Case: Bankruptcy case
Electronic Data Involved: 14 hard drives; deleted data
Key Insight: District Court sustained plaintiff?s objection to magistrate judge?s discovery order to the extent that factual findings omitted consideration of an exhibit submitted with plaintiff?s motion, which constituted evidence of defendant?s past possession of email which should have been produced in response to a particular discovery request (the exhibit was an email that discussed at least one prior email which was not produced); court remanded to magistrate judge issue of whether to compel further response or production in response to that particular discovery request
Nature of Case: Prisoner asserted claims relating to prison’s Kosher Meal Program
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Where plaintiff argued that it was willing to produce documents that were the subject of defendant’s motion to compel, but had been waiting for a response from defense counsel as to how to best produce electronic documents (which formed the bulk of the production), court set date for production and expressed hope that “the parties will be able to work out how best to produce documents contained in electronic format on their own”
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.