Electronic Discovery Law – Page 218 – Legal issues, news and best practices relating to the discovery of electronically stored information.

United States v. AT&T, Inc., No. 1:11-cv-01560, 2011 WL 5347178 (D.D.C. Nov. 6, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Court denied non-party?s motion to quash defendant?s subpoena where defendant adequately narrowed its request and where the non-party failed to establish that the burden of responding was undue, including by failing to provide particulars related to the expected burden of responding; court?s analysis closely followed standard set forth in Rule 26(b)(2)(C)(iii)

Nature of Case: DOJ investigation

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Gentex Corp. v. Sutter, No. 3:07-CV-1269, 2011 WL 5040893 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 24, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: For defendant?s employees? intentional spoliation, including use of scrubbing software and destruction of CD-ROMS, court imposed default judgment against the employees but declined to impose sanctions on defendant corporation where questions of fact remained as to whether it engaged in spoliation

Nature of Case: Violations of Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and PA Uniform Trade Secrets Act

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Felman Prod., Inc. v. Indus. Risk. Insurers, No. 3:09-0481, 2011 WL 4547012 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 29, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: For egregious discovery violations, including attempting to conceal relevant custodians, failure to issue litigation holds, spoliation, delay, and lack of candor, the court granted in part defendants? motion for terminating sanctions and dismissed plaintiff?s claim for business interruption losses?the claim most affected by the discovery abuse; court declined to dismiss all claims where, despite the discovery violations, defendants? were not sufficiently prejudiced to support terminating sanctions, but found an adverse inference instruction to be ?an adequate remedy?

Nature of Case: Complaint seeking payment of insurance claims; counterclaim for fraud

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Greater Lakes Ambulatory Surgical Ctr., PLLC v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., No. 11-11003, 2011 WL 5245141 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 3, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Where defendant indicated that the requested records were not readily searchable because the information sought was not tracked, that compliance with plaintiffs? request would require manual review of ?hundreds of thousands of claims,? that the claim files were not stored as searchable images, and that the cost of reviewing the claim files could eclipse $100,000, the court concluded that defendant had demonstrated undue burden and denied plaintiffs? motion to compel; court also indicated that plaintiffs could have pursued alternative avenues of discovery where defendant indicated that a third party maintained the information requested but failed to do so and that defendant should not be ?required to engage in labor and resource intensive discovery . . . merely because Plaintiff?s failed to subpoena a third-party . . . .?

Nature of Case: Suit arising from Defendant’s refusal to pay certain charges for services provided to insured

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

Madere v. Compass Bank, No. A-10-CV-812 LY, 2011 WL 5155643 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 28, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff?s motion to compel production of email requiring restoration of backup tapes where defendant?s expert averred that it would cost over $270,000 and require hundreds of hours to accomplish, where plaintiff?s expert could not ?ascertain an estimate for the actual cost,? and where ?even if the actual cost of restoring the backup tapes was only a fraction? of the estimated amount, it ?would still outweigh the amount [Plaintiff] seeks to recover?

Nature of Case: Violation of FMLA

Electronic Data Involved: Emails on backup tapes

Miller v. Four Winds Int. Corp., No. 2:10-cv-00254-CWD, 2011 WL 5080032 (D. Idaho Oct. 25, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Where plaintiff testified in deposition that she had saved relevant voice messages two years prior and that they were still available but later indicated that the messages were lost as a result of water damage to her phone and the passage of time (her service carrier indicated the messages were automatically deleted after a certain time), the court found that because she had previously indicated that the messages were available and because there was no evidence presented of when the messages became inaccessible, spoliation had occurred; court indicated an adverse inference ?may be appropriate? but withheld a final determination until it could consider the evidence offered at trial

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: Voicemail

Osborne LLC v. C.H. Robinson Co., No. 08 C 50165, 2011 WL 5076267 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 25, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Where defendant ?was late in responding to some of plaintiff?s discovery requests, and failed to respond to Plaintiff?s good faith attempts to open a dialogue about electronic discovery? and where there was evidence that defendant knew what plaintiff was seeking but ?was deliberatively evasive and caused unnecessary delay? (by failing to produce relevant records because plaintiff had not specifically asked for documents containing specific terms, for example) the court indicted that defendant?s actions were not in line with the Federal Rules, the Seventh Circuit?s Pilot Program principles, or the Sedona Principles and ordered payment of certain of plaintiff?s fees and costs; court noted Plaintiff?s contributions to the delays by ?aggressively pursuing motions to compel and for sanctions when there may have been opportunities for more amicable resolutions? and thus declined to impose cost or fees related to duplicative or repetitive motions

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: ESI

People v. Saibu, D054980, 2011 WL 73314 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Where trial court admitted enhanced digital photos despite prosecution?s failure to disclose that the photograph had been enhanced, or how , but offered defendant an opportunity to remedy the prejudice and locate an opposing expert, appellate court found no abuse of discretion; appellate court found no error in trial court?s failure to require a Kelly hearing with respect to the enhancement techniques where it was ?questionable? whether the Photoshop program used could be considered a scientific technique and where the expert testified that he had been using Photoshop since for 8 years, that it was ?widely available? and ?considered an essential tool? and where an appellate court in Washington had previously determined that the enhancement of latent prints with Photoshop was ?generally accepted in the relevant scientific community?; foundation was properly laid for admission of photos where expert testified as to how they were created and where ?other witnesses? testified that the surveillance video (from which still photos were taken) accurately depicted the events they had witnessed

Nature of Case: Robbery, murder

Electronic Data Involved: Enhanced digital photo

People v. Lesser, No. H034189, 2011 WL 193460 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 21, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Appellate court affirmed trial court?s admission of printouts of online chats preserved by a police officer, despite the fact that the version presented at trial contained emoticons that prior versions presented at preliminary examination did not or that introductory lines for the chats were not preserved in the printouts, where the officer ?offered sufficient evidence of the method by which he preserved the text? and where he testified that ?the printouts were accurate and complete? representations of the chats; the printouts were not inadmissible hearsay as argued by defendant because they were not offered for the truth of the matters asserted but rather were offered to show that defendant in fact made the statements

Nature of Case: Attempted distribution of harmful matter to a minor over the internet and related charges

Electronic Data Involved: Instant messages

Commonwealth Fin. Sys., Inc. v. Smith, No. 3435 EDA 2009, 2011 WL 489704 (Pa. Super. Ct. Feb. 14, 2011)

Dec 01 2011

Key Insight: Appellate court affirmed trial court?s exclusion of electronic business records obtained by the plaintiff from the former holders of defendant?s debt, where the trial court properly concluded that the a representative of the plaintiff corporation was not ?the right person to establish the Citibank records? (because he was not familiar with how the records were created or maintained and had no personal knowledge of the entries on the at-issue spreadsheet, for example) and held that ?CPS failed to establish the trustworthiness and reliability of the records sufficiently to permit their admission into evidence? pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 803(6), among other things

Nature of Case: Action to collect credit card debt

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records