Key Insight: In case where parties disputed whether arbitration agreement applied to plaintiff and motion on the issue was pending, court allowed limited discovery and ordered defendant to choose up to 10 individuals whose files (electronic or otherwise) would be searched for information falling within certain categories
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Finding requests for production too broad and not reasonably particularized, appellate court concluded that trial court had erred in, among other things, not adequately resolving the question of how burdensome compliance with production requests would have proven to nonparties, where nonparties? counsel opined that it would take 5,260 hours to review email, at cost of $1,393,900, and requesting party?s expert estimated only 10 hours for such review; appellate court granted writ and vacated trial court’s orders
Nature of Case: Nonparties sought writ of mandate overturning trial court’s orders granting motion to compel depositions and production of documents pursuant to subpoenas
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and dismissal of opponent’s counterclaims and affirmative defenses based upon spoliation of evidence described as “intentionally modifying and deleting files from the laptops central to this case,” finding that evidence was “far from clear-cut” that defendants destroyed evidence sufficient to warrant a death-penalty sanction
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets and other claims
Electronic Data Involved: Files on laptops
Key Insight: Court found that the computerized claim file was clearly relevant, irrespective of whether plaintiffs intended to use the documents or not in the litigation, and ordered plaintiffs to produce the complete claim file, including hard copies and electronic documents, to the extent such documents were not privileged or prepared for the sole purpose of “probable” or “imminent” litigation
Nature of Case: Insurance coverage
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic claim file
Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to impose terminating sanctions against plaintiff after years of “discovery stonewalling” which culminated in the intentional destruction of evidence; plaintiff “regularly and routinely” disobeyed trial court orders and intentionally destroyed relevant accounting records on hard drive that was to be mirror imaged
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of funds
Electronic Data Involved: Accounting files on hard drive
Key Insight: Where court found that ULLICO had in bad faith “grossly abused” the use of the “confidential” designation allowed under parties’ stipulated protective order, court ordered ULLICO to completely re-do its confidentiality designations and also ensure that the documents were correctly identified in parties’ joint discovery database
Nature of Case: ERISA litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Confidential documents, joint discovery database
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s renewed motion for sanctions where plaintiff had failed to satisfy local meet and confer requirement; parties had previously engaged in meet and confer during recess and agreed on search methodology for responsive documents and emails
Nature of Case: Trademark and copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Spreadsheet; email
Key Insight: Where record showed that defendants’ record keeping was episodic at best, and that existing documentation was inaccurate and possibly manufactured for the litigation, court directed plaintiff, if she wished to undertake a forensic examination of any computer, to provide a detailed affidavit by a specialist who would conduct such testing, including a precise specification of what is to be done, for what purpose and in what period of time
Nature of Case: Breach of fiduciary duty against art gallery
Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive
Key Insight: Where plaintiff provided only partial production and made false representations to court about non-existence of responsive documents, court imposed monetary sanctions and would deem as true certain contentions
Nature of Case: Trademark infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email concerning customer communications
Key Insight: Where defendant objected to providing hard copies of payment data and offered instead to make its database available to plaintiff in New York, court questioned prudence of offer and ordered production to take place in Houston, adding that parties should attempt to arrange for materials to be produced electronically and directing them to confer on method of production
Nature of Case: Breach of contract
Electronic Data Involved: Database
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.