Case Summaries – Page 397 – Electronic Discovery Law

Plaintiff Ordered to Produce Computer-readable Tape Previously Produced in Hard Copy Form

Dec 15 2004

Nat’l Union Elec. Corp. v. Matsushita Elec. Ind. Co., 494 F.Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1980)

Defendant moved to require plaintiff’s computer experts to create a computer-readable computer tape containing sales data that had been produced in answers to interrogatories. Although the defendant could themselves create the tape, it would require two months and “many thousands of dollars.” 494 F.Supp. at 1258. Read More

BASF Fina Petrochemicals Ltd. P’ship v. H.B. Zachry Co., 2004 WL 2612835 (Tex. App. Nov. 18, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court awarded non-party its costs of production, but ruled that non-party was not entitled, under either Tex. R. Civ. P. 205.3 or 176.7, to recover attorneys’ fees incurred in responding to subpoena, noting that non-party obtained legal advice to protect its own interests, not to facilitate compliance with subpoena

Nature of Case: Construction litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. Sandoz, Ltd., 916 F. Supp. 404 (D.N.J. 1995)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Production of documents from litigation database without first conducting privilege review constituted inexcusable neglect and waived attorney-client privilege; inadvertent disclosure clause in governing protective order did not apply

Nature of Case: Environmental litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Memorandum selected from litigation database

Cummings v. Gen. Motors Corp., 365 F.3d 944 (10th Cir. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny motion to compel access to GM’s databases and grant protective order to GM where plaintiffs’ proposed computer database searches were overly broad in scope, duplicative of prior requests and unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: Database

Gambale v. Deutsche Bank Ag, 2002 WL 31655326 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Defendants ordered to provide an affidavit explaining steps taken to search paper and electronic files for responsive documents and feasibility and cost of retrieving certain emails. Plaintiff would then have option of consenting to protocol set forth in Rowe Entertainment as modified by Murphy Oil, or arguing for different protocol by conferring with defendant and submitting a joint letter outlining parties’ respective positions on the issue

Nature of Case: Gender discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email and electronic files

Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Failure to preserve certain computer hard drives did not warrant sanctions where there was no reasonable possibility that the missing hard drives (which were obtained after protective order was issued) contained evidence of the theft of trade secret information

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives

Kleiner v. Burns, 48 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 644, 2000 WL 1909470 (D. Kan. Dec. 15, 2000)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Granting motion to compel disclosure of all relevant computerized data under former Rule 26(a)(1), court observed: “As used by the advisory committee, ‘computerized data and other electronically-recorded information’ includes, but is not limited to: voice mail messages and files, back-up voice mail files, e-mail messages and files, backup e-mail files, deleted e-mails, data files, program files, backup and archival tapes, temporary files, system history files, web site information stored in textual, graphical or audio format, web site log files, cache files, cookies, and other electronically-recorded information.”

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement (posting of copyrighted photographs on web site)

Electronic Data Involved: All voice mails, email, web sites, web pages, and other relevant electronic data

Mathias v. Jacobs, 197 F.R.D. 29 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), vacated, 167 F. Supp. 2d 606 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s failure to preserve computer printouts and telephone lists loaded onto Palm Pilot did not warrant an adverse inference instruction, but did warrant monetary sanctions of $28,271.75 to be paid by party (not his attorney) to compensate the victim for attorneys’ fees and expenses arising both from additional discovery required to locate equivalent information by alternative means and from the motion practice necessitated by the spoliation

Nature of Case: Action seeking monetary damages and specific performance of stock option agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy material loaded onto Palm Pilot

Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340 (1978)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Requiring defendant to bear expense of identifying class members was abuse of discretion where cost of effort (over $16,000), which included manually sorting records, keypunching and creating software programs, would be same for plaintiff and no special circumstances existed

Nature of Case: Securities fraud class action

Electronic Data Involved: Computer tapes

In re Propulsid Prods. Liab. Litig., 2003 WL 22174137 (E.D. La. Sept. 9, 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Brief reference to court’s earlier order narrowing the scope of subpoena to hard copy documents only, rather than including production of electronic documents

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic production of documents

Catagory:Case Summaries