Key Insight: Defendant’s skepticism that plaintiff had not produced copies of all responsive documents did not entitle defendant to conduct physical inspection of plaintiff’s hard drives
Nature of Case: Breach of contract and quantum meruit claim
Electronic Data Involved: Computer and disc drives
Key Insight: Petition for writ of mandate denied; based on evidence that a business computer was used for accounting and nothing else, and that there was a risk the hard drive might be purged, trial court acted properly when it ordered the petitioner to produce the computer’s hard drive
Nature of Case: Misappropriation of funds
Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive
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
Key Insight: Court ruled that no work product waiver occurred when entire computer network account of USAO paralegal was inadvertently copied onto working copy of hard drive held by prosecution as evidence and made available to defense; defense motion to retain privileged documents denied
Nature of Case: Criminal charges of conspiracy, bank fraud, wire fraud and securities fraud
Electronic Data Involved: Privileged documents on computer hard drive
Key Insight: Parties ordered to resolve, within five days, scope of electronic discovery to be made by each plaintiff through the completion of the meet and confer process; if no resolution reached, hearing to be held six days later to resolve outstanding issues
Nature of Case: Individual securities fraud actions
Electronic Data Involved: Electronic discovery
Key Insight: After jury awarded plaintiffs $225,000 in compensatory and punitive damages, court considered as a post-judgment matter the issue of whether to impose sanctions against defendant for discovery abuse, allowing parties to conduct further discovery on the impact of defendant’s noncompliance and scheduling an evidentiary hearing on the issue
Nature of Case: Heirs of insured sued insurance company for breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, false representation and deceit
Electronic Data Involved: Computerized claims information
Key Insight: Sanctions not warranted where plaintiffs made ?tenuous allegation? without any specific evidentiary support that defendants had implemented a new email document retention policy after litigation was commenced and that potentially relative emails may have been destroyed pursuant to the policy
Nature of Case: Claimed violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities and Exchange Acts
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Magistrate recommended that non-parties’ motion for attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in appearing for depositions and responding to subpoenas be denied, since non-parties failed to object to subpoenas or condition compliance on reimbursement, and an award of $58,000, without notice to plaintiffs, would be tantamount to severe prejudice
Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard copy documents
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.