Tag:Data Preservation

1
Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 2004 WL 5326424 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Sept. 27, 2004)
2
Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2004 WL 1837997 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2004)
3
Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
4
Nutrition Mgmt. v. Harborside Healthcare Corp., 2004 WL 887401 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 19, 2004)
5
Sheppard v. River Valley Fitness One, LP, 203 F.R.D. 56 (D.N.H. 2001)
6
Ferrari v. Gisch, 225 F.R.D. 599 (C.D. Cal. 2004)
7
Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2004 WL 417193 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2004)
8
Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)
9
Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)
10
Smith v. Texaco Inc., 951 F. Supp. 109 (E.D. Tex. 1997)

Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2004 WL 1837997 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied motion for default judgment but granted motion for an adverse inference instruction and $20,000 in monetary sanctions where, in advance of court-ordered inspection, defendants deleted from their computers numerous electronic files which had been copied from former employer’s computer systems prior to their resignations, and, after the inspection, defendants failed to comply with court’s order that they delete all of plaintiffs’ files from their computers

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary information in electronic form

Hildreth Mfg., LLC v. Semco, Inc., 785 N.E.2d 774 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

Key Insight: Failure to preserve certain computer hard drives did not warrant sanctions where there was no reasonable possibility that the missing hard drives (which were obtained after protective order was issued) contained evidence of the theft of trade secret information

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drives

Nutrition Mgmt. v. Harborside Healthcare Corp., 2004 WL 887401 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 19, 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion in limine to preclude testimony, which was based on speculation that email had been destroyed, since defendants produced sworn testimony that all relevant emails were produced, and legitimate reason for erasing some emails “was simply a function of cleaning the junk mail and other clutter from the computer software and disk storage space”

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and tort claims

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Sheppard v. River Valley Fitness One, LP, 203 F.R.D. 56 (D.N.H. 2001)

Key Insight: Defense counsel’s failure to produce computer records and to retain all drafts of settlement documents reflected lack of diligence rather than intentional effort to abuse discovery process; testimony of witness barred and $500 awarded as sanctions

Nature of Case: Sexual harassment

Electronic Data Involved: Computer records

Ferrari v. Gisch, 225 F.R.D. 599 (C.D. Cal. 2004)

Key Insight: Where statute specifically imposed a duty on defendants to preserve evidence, and defendants represented they had complied and will comply with the statute, and plaintiffs adduced no evidence of non-compliance, court declined to enter an order mandating the preservation of evidence

Nature of Case: Securities fraud class action

Electronic Data Involved: All relevant documents, data compilations and tangible things

Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2004 WL 417193 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2004)

Key Insight: Motion for sanctions for destruction of email denied since plaintiff failed to follow procedure set forth in court’s prior order which would have required plaintiff to file a petition seeking the appointment of a computer forensics expert, and instead waited over seven months to bring the issue to the court in the form of a motion for sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted email

Hypro, LLC v. Reser, 2004 WL 2905321 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 2004)

Key Insight: In light of defendant’s previous attempt to delete incriminating email and documents from his company laptop, court entered order requiring all parties to preserve and protect evidence

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of corporate opportunity and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents and mail

Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)

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

Smith v. Texaco Inc., 951 F. Supp. 109 (E.D. Tex. 1997)

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

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