Tag:Data Preservation

1
Mazzei v. Money Store, —Fed. Appx.—, 2016 WL 3902256 (2d Cir. July 15, 2016)
2
Orologio of Short Hills Inc. v Swatch Grp. (U.S.) Inc., 653 Fed. Appx. 134 (3rd Cir. 2016)
3
McQueen v. Aramark Corp. – 201611 (D. Utah, 2016)
4
Davis v. Crescent Electric Company et al. (D. S.D., 2016)
5
Reyes et al. v. Julia Place Condominiums Homeowners Association, Inc., et al. (E.D. La., 2016)
6
Trude v. Glenwood State Bank (Min. App., 2016)
7
First American Title Insurance Company v. Northwest Title Insurance Agency, LLC, No. 2:15-cv-00229-DN-PMW (D. Utah, Aug. 31, 2016).
8
Teledyne Technologies, Inc. v. Shekar (N.D. Ill., 2016)
9
Trude et al. v. Glenwood State Bank, et al., Nos. A15-0378, A15-1863, A15-1864 (Minn. App. Aug. 15, 2016)
10
Emergency Response Specialists, Inc v. CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc N.D. Ala. August 4, 2016 (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2016)

Mazzei v. Money Store, —Fed. Appx.—, 2016 WL 3902256 (2d Cir. July 15, 2016)

Key Insight: District court did not abuse discretion in declining to impose an adverse inference for failure to preserve ESI in an accessible format and instead awarding costs and attorneys fees where the at issue system “contained only ‘tangential information'” and where Plaintiff failed to seek discovery from other sources; Circuit court’s analysis noted recently amended Rule 37(e)’s required finding of intent to impose an adverse inference and that the District Court “specifically found that defendants did not act with such intent”

Nature of Case: Class action: breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: ESI in third party custody but under control of defendants

Orologio of Short Hills Inc. v Swatch Grp. (U.S.) Inc., 653 Fed. Appx. 134 (3rd Cir. 2016)

Key Insight: Court affirmed District Court?s denial of Plaintiff?s motion to strike Defendant?s answer and issue sanctions on alleged spoliation, absent a finding that the hard-copy tapes at issue were destroyed in bad faith. The evidence in the record indicated the tapes were destroyed for the sole reason that the Defendant did not wish to pay a storage fee for the tapes; there was no reference to the litigation in the emails regarding the destruction.

Nature of Case: Alleged violations of Robinson Patman Act and NJ Franchise Practices Act

Electronic Data Involved: Hard-copy tapes containing “tagged television commercials”

McQueen v. Aramark Corp. – 201611 (D. Utah, 2016)

Key Insight: Sanctions imposed after defendant’s failure to preserve relevant ESI after receiving a preservation letter from plaintiff.

Nature of Case: Wrongful death.

Electronic Data Involved: ESI work orders and related paper records.

Keywords: Defendant acted with gross negligence, but without intent to deprive the plaintiff of the information’s use in the litigation.

View Case Opinion

Davis v. Crescent Electric Company et al. (D. S.D., 2016)

Key Insight: NDA adequately protects confidential and/or privileged information during forensic examination

Nature of Case: employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: email

Keywords: forensic examination

View Case Opinion

Trude v. Glenwood State Bank (Min. App., 2016)

Key Insight: sanctions affirmed for discovery violations including using data wiping software to delete files

Nature of Case: repossession

Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records

Keywords: earth moving equipment repossession, deleted computer files, data wiping

Identified State Rule(s): Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02

View Case Opinion

First American Title Insurance Company v. Northwest Title Insurance Agency, LLC, No. 2:15-cv-00229-DN-PMW (D. Utah, Aug. 31, 2016).

Key Insight: no spoliation becuase no evidence responsive data deleted and no prejudice. Oral litigation hold upheld, but be wary.

Nature of Case: Breach of Contract; Unfair Competition

Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI- personal emails, files from work computer

Keywords: oral litigation hold; spoliation

Trude et al. v. Glenwood State Bank, et al., Nos. A15-0378, A15-1863, A15-1864 (Minn. App. Aug. 15, 2016)

Key Insight: Plaintiff failed to respond to discovery requests. Plaintiff also used data wiping software hours before turning computer over for forensic examination. Defendant granted default judgment.

Nature of Case: Repossession/Ownership

Electronic Data Involved: Files on Computer

Keywords: default judgment, contempt, data wipe

Emergency Response Specialists, Inc v. CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc N.D. Ala. August 4, 2016 (UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2016)

Key Insight: lost evidence, data preservation

Nature of Case: breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: destroyed electronic records of experts

Keywords: Case dismissal applicable only in extreme circumstances, defensible collection

View Case Opinion

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.