Electronic Discovery Law

Legal issues, news and best practices relating to the discovery of electronically stored information.

1
Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute, et al. v. Obhof (6th Circuit, 2020)
2
Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (W.D. Wash. 2020)
3
Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (Western District of Washington, 2020)
4
Nguyen v. Costco Wholesale Corporation (S.D. Fla 2020)
5
Nguyen v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (District of South Florida, 2020)
6
Mannion, et al. v. Ameri-Can Freight Systems Incorporated, et al. (district of AZ, 2020)
7
Rhino Metals, Inc. v. Sturdy Gun Safe, Inc. (District of Idaho, 2020)
8
Slingerland v. Crisp Marketing, LLC (Southern District of Florida, 2020)
9
KCI USA, Inc. v. Healthcare Essentials, Inc., 797 Fed.Appx. 1002 (6th Cir. Jan. 16, 2020).
10
Hurry Family Revocable Trust, et al. v. Frankel (M.D. Fla. 2020)

Ohio A. Philip Randolph Institute, et al. v. Obhof (6th Circuit, 2020)

Key Insight: third parties want the court to investigate all of the people that had access to discovery materials and assure that they are destroyed for fear of future litigation or political liability

Nature of Case: gerrymandering

Electronic Data Involved: discovery that had been produced

Keywords: preserving confidentiality of information, public accessibility

View Case Opinion

Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (W.D. Wash. 2020)

Key Insight: The communications with Plaintiff’s consultant were not privileged because the consultant was not a “functional employee.” There is no evidence that the consultant had “information about the company that would assist the company’s attorneys in rendering legal advice.” Additionally, there was no evidence that consultant’s communications with counsel were primarily of a legal nature rather than a business one.

Defendant’s request for sanctions was premature. Rule 37 sanctions are only allowed against a party for disobeys a court issued discovery order. Additionally, no evidence was presented in support of Defendant’s spoliation theory other than a failure to produce documents to its subpoena. Without evidence regarding what was destroyed, when it occurred, the extent of Plaintiff’s involvement, and resulting prejudice, sanctions are inappropriate.

Nature of Case: Trademark Infringement, Breach of Contract

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Case Summary

Digital Mentor, Inc. v. Ovivo USA, LLC (Western District of Washington, 2020)

Key Insight: Failure to produce; Sanctions; Proportionality

Nature of Case: Trademark & Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Hard copy; correspondence; email

Keywords: “Functional employee”; Consultant; Third-party communications; Privilege; Spoliation; Unfair prejudice; Attorney’s fees and costs; Proportionality; Access/Resources;

View Case Opinion

Nguyen v. Costco Wholesale Corporation (S.D. Fla 2020)

Key Insight: Defendant had no duty to preserve the allegedly spoliated video for the almost two years before the filing of the lawsuit because there was no indication Plaintiffs intended to pursue litigation. Plaintiffs failed to present evidence indicating the allegedly spoliated video was relevant to this litigation which would trigger a duty to take reasonable steps to preserve it. No sanctions are warranted.

Nature of Case: Slip and Fall Liability, Personal Injury

Electronic Data Involved: Surveillance Video

Case Summary

Nguyen v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (District of South Florida, 2020)

Key Insight: spoliation of video evidence requested by plaintiff

Nature of Case: Slip and fall liability

Electronic Data Involved: Surveillance camera footage

Keywords: spoliation, surveillance, sanctions

View Case Opinion

Mannion, et al. v. Ameri-Can Freight Systems Incorporated, et al. (district of AZ, 2020)

Key Insight: whether the issue of spoliation could be brought before the jury to decide if evidence was withheld and if that was justified

Nature of Case: personal injury, motor vehicle

Electronic Data Involved: Log books of defendant

Keywords: spoliation, jury instruction, question of law/fact

View Case Opinion

Rhino Metals, Inc. v. Sturdy Gun Safe, Inc. (District of Idaho, 2020)

Key Insight: two reports for different suits, written by the same expert. defendants in those cases subpoenaed each other’s report to get it without confidentiality restrictions

Nature of Case: intellectual property infringement

Electronic Data Involved: expert report deemed confidential

Keywords: subpoena, expert report, confidential, privilege, protective order

View Case Opinion

Slingerland v. Crisp Marketing, LLC (Southern District of Florida, 2020)

Key Insight: discovery requests overbroad

Nature of Case: telephone consumer protection act

Electronic Data Involved: general discovery

Keywords: scope of relevant discovery, class action

View Case Opinion

KCI USA, Inc. v. Healthcare Essentials, Inc., 797 Fed.Appx. 1002 (6th Cir. Jan. 16, 2020).

Key Insight: Former attorneys sanctioned (firm and individually) for discovery failures during representation. Court determined they had been denied due process and sanctions should not have been imposed.

Nature of Case: Trade Practices, Unfair Competition, Tortious Interference

Electronic Data Involved: Various Items in Discovery

Keywords: discovery sanctions, individual attorneys, due process, notice

View Case Opinion

Hurry Family Revocable Trust, et al. v. Frankel (M.D. Fla. 2020)

Key Insight: Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Compel Production of Documents and Request for Sanctions. The documents sought were specific emails. Opposing the Motion, Defendant argued that it was untimely as it was submitted four months after the discovery deadline, and that the emails sought were not responsive to Plaintiff’s earlier document (discovery) request. The Court denied Plaintiffs’ Motion.

Nature of Case: Intellectual Property, Trade Secrets

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Case Summary

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