Key Insight: Court denied party’s motion to compel financial data in searchable electronic format in part because moving party had itself refused to produce its financials in searchable electronic format
Nature of Case: Patent litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Financial materials produced on CD in unsearchable “TIFF” format
Key Insight: After concluding that personal injury plaintiffs had failed to establish any document withholding or other discovery abuse by Exxon, state appellate court conditionally granted writ of mandamus and directed the trial court to vacate its orders requiring Exxon to present a deponent to testify about documents that had been requested, specifically as to: (1) existence; (2) electronic creation, duplication and storage; (3) document retention and destruction policies; (4) location; (5) organization, indexing and filing; (6) method of search; (7) completeness; and (8) authenticity
Nature of Case: Petition for writ of mandamus
Electronic Data Involved: Rule 30(b)(6) deposition
Key Insight: Trial court did not err in denying motion for curative jury instructions, a sanction of default, and, after the verdict, a new trial, based upon defendant’s failure to produce a draft expert report; finding no misconduct, trial court had observed: “While I agree that . . . hard copies of draft [expert] reports are discoverable, I am aware of no legal principle that would require a testifying expert witness to separately retain all electronic drafts, including those that were overridden or subsumed during the drafting process.”
Nature of Case: Insurance coverage
Electronic Data Involved: Draft expert report
Key Insight: Court ruled that American Express would be allowed to conduct a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition to address the topics of Wells Fargo’s document retention, collection and production efforts in the litigation, but that such deposition would be limited to three hours; court further noted: “American Express and Wells Fargo have each declined to produce certain information, for example, the content of their ‘litigation hold’ notices. In such situations, it is unlikely that I would compel one party to produce such information, unless American Express and all of the Bank Defendants stipulate to simultaneous exchange of all their information concerning a given topic.”
Nature of Case: Antitrust
Electronic Data Involved: Legal hold notices
Key Insight: Defendant ordered to make good faith effort to locate responsive emails that were discussed at deposition; if defendant claims that such documents cannot be retrieved, defendant must file a written statement indicating all steps taken to obtain said emails and explain in detail why they could not be retrieved; defendant further warned that failure to comply could result in sanctions being imposed
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Although court decided it could not hold either party in contempt, it advised that parties? exchange of emails and written correspondence did not satisfy meet and confer requirement contained in court’s earlier Case Management Order; court understood the phrase to mean “a conference in which opposing parties actually talk to one another”
Nature of Case: Patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s motion to compel, court ordered defendant to submit a brief showing cause why, if it so contends, it is not capable of pulling names of persons who audited each of the 108 loans from its electronic archives and, if it is capable of so doing, why, if it so contends, the burden of pulling such information would be prohibitive
Nature of Case: Former employee alleged that her former employer violated False Claims Act
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data and email
Key Insight: Internet publishers successfully petitioned California appellate court for writ of certiorari directing that subpoenas issued by Apple Computer, Inc. be quashed; trial court erred in denying motion for protective order because, among other reasons, subpoena to email service provider could not be enforced consistent with the plain terms of the federal Stored Communications Act
Nature of Case: Underlying suit involved misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims
Electronic Data Involved: Email containing information regarding sources of trade secret information posted on internet
Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff?s motion for sanctions based upon spoliation allegedly committed by former president when he erased from his computer copies of documents containing information he believed to be proprietary to plaintiff, since defendant ?discarded the documents to avoid impropriety, not to engage in it? and because the evidence that was the subject of the spoliation claim was in the record and plaintiff suffered no prejudice
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims
Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary electronic documents, including business plans and customer lists
Key Insight: Court imposed monetary sanctions but not adverse inference instruction where defendant negligently failed to implement adequate litigation hold and preserve electronic evidence, but evidence was insufficient to show defendant acted in bad faith or with culpable state of mind or that plaintiff had suffered any prejudice
Nature of Case: Environmental litigation
Electronic Data Involved: Email and backup tapes
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.