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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Key Insight: Government’s past evidentiary failures in other similar litigation appeared to be so pervasive and systematic as to provide ample support for issuance of a document preservation order in this case
Nature of Case: Tribe sued government for mismanagement of trust accounts
Electronic Data Involved: Documents stored in various media related to parties’ claims
Key Insight: Defendant’s motion to dissolve TRO requiring preservation of documents and electronic data denied, however, “to mitigate the high costs associated with electronic document storage, the court will permit defendants to delete electronic records in the ordinary and usual course of business; provided, however, that hard copy records be made and kept of any and all [relevant] electronic records . . .”
Nature of Case: Race discrimination
Electronic Data Involved: Unspecified human resources records, payroll records
Key Insight: Since plaintiff elected not to conduct its own inspection of defendant’s hard drives, it could not avoid summary judgment on misappropriation of trade secrets claim by merely speculating about the presence of trade secret material on defendant’s computers, when defendant?s (admittedly cursory) inspection turned up no trade secret material
Nature of Case: Trademark infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, contract breach
Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.