Electronic Discovery Law

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

1
Managing Your Paper Trail: Do You Know Where Your Files Are?
2
Electronic Records Management and E-Discovery Forum
3
Evidence Rules Advisory Committee Meets to Discuss Proposed ER 502 Today
4
Plaintiff’s Disposal of “Crashed” Home Computer Warrants Adverse Inference Instruction
5
JOLT Releases Annual Survey of E-Discovery
6
No Sanctions for Testifying Experts’ Failure to Retain Drafts or Preserve Email to and from Counsel
7
Defendant to Produce Email from Backup Tapes at Its Own Expense; Cost-Shifting May Be Ordered Later
8
Evidentiary Hearing Required Before Court Can Order State Agency to Produce Email from Backup Tapes
9
Costs of Special Master Appointed to Manage Discovery of City’s Computers to be Paid by City as Spoliation Sanction
10
10 Worst E-Discovery Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Managing Your Paper Trail: Do You Know Where Your Files Are?

K&L Gates partner Todd Reuter penned the following article on document retention for the March 2007 issue of Spokane Business Catalyst magazine:

"Developments in communications technologies promised to free us from the printed word, but the paperless office never materialized. In fact, both paper and electronic records have increased, creating backlogged inboxes both on your computer and on your desk. And, if you’re like most people, that current set of documents likely grows exponentially every day

From a legal perspective, this might be a problem. The more documents you have, the more you will need to produce in “discovery” should you find yourself in the middle of a lawsuit."

Click here to read the entire article.

Electronic Records Management and E-Discovery Forum

April 16-17, 2007
Four Seasons Hotel
Vancouver, B.C.

K&L Gates partner Helen Bergman Moure presented at this recent event, offering valuable insight into the current state of e-discovery in the United States, including the recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the impact of recent notable cases on document retention standards and practices, and current case law developments.

“This conference is designed to help you contain risk linked to electronic records management and bring you up to date on how laws and procedures are changing to deal with this new reality in both a business and litigation context.  Some highlights of this timely event are:

• Planning an eRecords strategy to ensure records meet new legal standards
• Meeting your obligations in regards to privacy and FOIPPA access requests
• Best records management policies and procedures that are also cost efficient
• Emerging US trends that may affect Canadian standards and litigation
• Obtain a checklist of current solutions for data retention policies
• Learn tips from organizations that have implemented eRecord management systems to save time and money and avoid risk
• Essential insights on avoiding spoliation and related sanctions

For more information about the conference, click here.

Evidence Rules Advisory Committee Meets to Discuss Proposed ER 502 Today

The Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Evidence is meeting today and tomorrow in San Diego to discuss, among other things, the proposed Evidence Rule 502 on waiver of attorney-client privilege and work product.  The Committee must determine whether to recommend proposed Rule 502 to the Standing Committee for ultimate adoption by Congress.  Portions of the Committee’s Agenda Book for the April 12 and 13, 2007 meeting relating to proposed Rule 502 are available here:

Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, Minutes of the Meeting of November 16, 2006 (not yet approved)

Memorandum to Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules dated March 15, 2007, Re: Proposed Rule 502: Possible Changes to Rule as Released for Public Comment

This memorandum analyzes all the colorable suggestions for change to the rule as issued for public comment.

Read More

Plaintiff’s Disposal of “Crashed” Home Computer Warrants Adverse Inference Instruction

Teague v. Target Corp., 2007 WL 1041191 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 4, 2007)

In this employment litigation, defendant had asserted as an affirmative defense plaintiff’s failure to mitigate her damages.  During discovery, it was revealed that plaintiff owned a home computer from December 1995 until August 2004, which plaintiff had used to conduct her entire on-line job search after leaving defendant’s employ, including researching job opportunities on the Internet, submitting on-line employment applications, and exchanging emails with prospective employers.  Plaintiff also used the computer to send and receive emails regarding her termination and her claims of gender discrimination.  The computer was discarded approximately one year after plaintiff had retained regarding her prospective claims and after she filed her charge of discrimination with the EEOC. Plaintiff claimed that she discarded the computer because it "crashed.”  Plaintiff admitted that she never took the computer to any type of computer professional to see if it could be repaired.
Read More

JOLT Releases Annual Survey of E-Discovery

The Richmond Journal of Law & Technology (JOLT) released its third Annual Survey of Electronic Discovery this week.  The issue features articles on a number of important issues relating to the new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including managing preservation obligations, accessible vs. inaccessable data, and creative approaches to cost-shifting.  Thanks to Jon Player, editor-in-chief, for bringing this to our attention. 

No Sanctions for Testifying Experts’ Failure to Retain Drafts or Preserve Email to and from Counsel

Univ. of Pittsburgh v. Townsend, 2007 WL 1002317 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 30, 2007)

In this case, the University of Pittsburgh alleged that defendants misappropriated the University’s rights and interests in valuable medical scanning technology that the University alleged was developed collaboratively at its campus over the course of several years.  In addition to Daubert motions, defendants moved the court for an excluding the testimony of plaintiff’s proposed experts based on spoliation of evidence.  Specifically, defendants alleged that the experts, along with plaintiff’s counsel, admittedly destroyed copies of emails and draft expert reports.  Defendants argued that, as a result of the spoliation, they were unfairly prejudiced and denied the opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses as to counsel’s contributions to their expert reports.
Read More

Defendant to Produce Email from Backup Tapes at Its Own Expense; Cost-Shifting May Be Ordered Later

In re Veeco Instruments, Inc. Sec. Litig., 2007 WL 983987 (S.D.N.Y. April 2, 2007)

In this securities class action, defendants resisted lead plaintiff’s motion to compel production of email and other non-privileged documents.  Defendants argued that restoring the backup tapes and searches involved would be extraordinarily burdensome and costly, and that such costs should be shifted to plaintiff.  The court observed that, “[s]urprisingly,” the parties had not entered into an agreed protocol for electronic discovery, nor had they discussed the issue of searching backup tapes.  It also found that, given the lack of discussion on the subject, it would be unreasonable for plaintiff to assume that backup tapes were being searched.
Read More

Evidentiary Hearing Required Before Court Can Order State Agency to Produce Email from Backup Tapes

Georgia Dept. of Agric. v. Griffin Ind., 2007 WL 805795 (Ga. Ct. App. Mar. 19, 2007)

In this case, Griffin Industries had sought records from the Georgia Department of Agriculture relating to its facilities’ emissions and odor issues, including relevant emails.  The Department produced documents, but advised that it did not “archive” its emails.  It stated that the only possible source of such information was a series of emergency computer backup tapes, which would be made available.  The parties then corresponded about taking the tapes out of daily backup circulation to avoid erasing data, and about who would pay for replacement tapes necessary to keep the Department’s backup procedures operational.
Read More

Costs of Special Master Appointed to Manage Discovery of City’s Computers to be Paid by City as Spoliation Sanction

Padgett v. City of Monte Sereno, 2007 WL 878575 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2007)

Plaintiffs in this litigation sued the city of Monte Sereno and several city employees for civil rights violations and other torts.  Among other things, plaintiffs alleged that certain city employees had sent plaintiffs an anonymous, threatening letter that included a newspaper article downloaded from the Internet.  One city employee (Rice) subsequently admitted to authoring and sending the threatening letter from her workstation at City Hall.  Although Rice indicated that she wrote the letter at her own direction without telling anyone about it, plaintiffs contended that Rice wrote the letter at the direction of other city employees, including the city manager (Loventhal).  To explore this allegation, plaintiffs moved to compel inspection of the city’s computers, printers and backup tapes.
Read More

10 Worst E-Discovery Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

K&L Gates partner Todd L. Nunn will highlight some of the most common e-discovery blunders that parties and their counsel make, and offer practical guidance on how to avoid these missteps, at the Washington State Bar Association’s upcoming CLE event entitled "DARE TO DISCOVER: How to Employ and Respond to Discovery Tactics."  The program will take place on Thursday, April 5, 2007, from 8:25 a.m. – 4:15 p.m., with check-in and walk-in registration beginning at 7:30 a.m.  The location of the event is:  

Red Lion on Fifth Avenue, Emerald Ballroom I
1415 Fifth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101

Todd’s presentation, "10 Worst E-Discovery Mistakes and How to Avoid Them," begins at 2:45 p.m.

For more information, or to register, click here.

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