Catagory:Case Summaries

1
QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)
2
Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 2004 WL 764085 (D. Kan. Apr. 8, 2004)
3
Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)
4
United States v. Stewart, 294 F. Supp. 2d 490 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)
5
Wright v. AmSouth Bancorporation, 320 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2003)
6
Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 348 F.Supp.2d 332 (D.N.J. 2004) (“Mosaid IV”)
7
U.S. v. Siddiqui, 235 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2000)
8
Benton v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2001 WL 210685 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2001)
9
City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2004)
10
Daewoo Elecs. Co. v. United States, 650 F. Supp. 1003 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1986)

QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion for trial court to strike defendant’s answer and enter judgment for plaintiff on issue of liability, where defendant reformatted computer’s hard drive, effectively erasing any information the computer may have contained, a day before surrendering it for court-ordered inspection

Nature of Case: Dispute between former business partners

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 2004 WL 764085 (D. Kan. Apr. 8, 2004)

Key Insight: Defendant’s response to (overbroad) document request, which directed requesting party to defendant’s web site where relevant HR policies and a particular employee handbook could be retrieved, was not insufficient response; court narrowed request and ordered production of any additional documents within 20 days; no sanctions warranted

Nature of Case: Former employee alleged violations of free speech, due process and gender discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic HR policies and manuals

Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)

Key Insight: Defendant’s subpoena to ISP of plaintiff, which sought all copies of all email sent or received by anyone at plaintiff with no limitation as to time or scope, was “massively overbroad,” “patently unlawful,” and “transparently and egregiously” violated federal rules; besides warranting sanctions in underlying suit, subpoena was grounds for separate action by employees of plaintiff against defendant for violation of federal Stored Communications Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and state law

Nature of Case: Violation of federal electronic privacy and computer fraud statutes

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored by Internet Service Provider

United States v. Stewart, 294 F. Supp. 2d 490 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)

Key Insight: Court denied Stewart’s motion to disqualify the attorney who inadvertently read Stewart’s email from cross-examining her or participating in the preparation of her cross-examination

Nature of Case: Criminal proceedings re Stewart’s sale of ImClone stock

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Wright v. AmSouth Bancorporation, 320 F.3d 1198 (11th Cir. 2003)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of “computer diskette or tape copy of all word processing files created, modified and/or access by, or on behalf” of five employees over 2-1/2 year period as overbroad and unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Age discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Word processing files

Mosaid Techs. Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 348 F.Supp.2d 332 (D.N.J. 2004) (“Mosaid IV”)

Key Insight: Finding defendant’s actions went “far beyond mere negligence, demonstrating knowing and intentional conduct that led to the nonproduction of all technical e-mails,” district court affirmed the spoliation inference jury instruction and monetary sanctions imposed by magistrate

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email

U.S. v. Siddiqui, 235 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 2000)

Key Insight: District court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that an email was adequately authenticated by, among other things, the presence of defendant?s email address and the context and content of the email and was ?within its discretion? to deny hearsay objections to the introduction of the email because it was both an admission by a party AND was not hearsay in the first place where it was admitted to show the correspondents?? ?relationship and custom of communicating by e-mail.?

Nature of Case: Fraud, false statements to a federal agency, and obstruction of a federal investigation

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Benton v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2001 WL 210685 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 26, 2001)

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s ex parte motion to continue summary judgment and for additional discovery of defendant’s computer system denied where prior Rule 56(f) continuance had been granted and no showing was made of specific evidence expected to be elicited

Nature of Case: Insureds sued insurer for breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Insurer’s claims-handling computer system

City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied BATF’s motion to quash subpoenas since firearms tracing and licensing data maintained by BATF in federal databases was relevant and would be subject to a confidentiality order, and disclosure of the data was not precluded by appropriations statute or by law enforcement privilege

Nature of Case: City and families of shooting victims sued manufacturers, distributors and retailers of weapons

Electronic Data Involved: Database maintained by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Daewoo Elecs. Co. v. United States, 650 F. Supp. 1003 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1986)

Key Insight: Zenith’s motion to compel granted, requiring production in usable form of SAS data sets, constituting final refined forms of data used to compute final results; court criticized government’s inordinately restrictive interpretation of its discovery obligations: “To say that the data sets into which the computer tapes were transferred are not governed by an order speaking of computer tapes is as if someone had said at the dawn of the era of typewriters that typed documents are not governed by a court order speaking of ‘writings.'”

Nature of Case: Proceeding to review Dept. of Commerce’s review of antidumping duty order regarding television sets

Electronic Data Involved: Data sets

Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.