Key Insight: Magistrate Judge denied motion for spoliation sanctions where plaintiff?s possession of some emails that arguably should have been produced by defendant but were not was ?somewhat probative? but fell short of establishing that other relevant emails were created by defendant and then destroyed; upheld on appeal
Electronic Data Involved: Email
Key Insight: Court rejected defendant?s assertion that relevant video surveillance footage was protected as work product as a result of its preservation in anticipation of litigation and pursuant to the direction of counsel where the video was ?made as part of the normal course of surveillance videos made by NCL? and ?was not created in the work product context?
Nature of Case: Slip and fall
Electronic Data Involved: Surveillance footage
Key Insight: Highlighting that a party?s duty of preservation is owed to the court and not to a potential plaintiff, court found that defendant was grossly negligent in its failure to issue a litigation hold or take other efforts to ensure preservation of relevant evidence and ordered an adverse inference; court also found that defendant acted ?willfully in failing to timely and adequately respond to the document requests? where defendant?s search terms were not ?calculated to capture? relevant documents and where a court ordered (re)search resulted in production of thousands of documents only three days before the close of discovery and ordered defendant to reimburse plaintiff for expenses incurred as a result of the misconduct and for the reasonable attorney?s fees spent to challenge the misconduct, prepare for additional depositions, and bring the instant motion for sanctions; court?s opinion specifically declined to hold that a lack of written litigation hold was negligence per se
Nature of Case: Breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, etc. related to purchase of condominium
Electronic Data Involved: Emails, ESI
Key Insight: Despite the intentional deletion of ESI by defendant?s employee, court declined to impose evidentiary sanctions where there was no showing of prejudice (because the vast majority of deleted ESI was recovered); court also denied request for attorneys? costs and fees pursuant to its inherent authority or under Rule 37
Nature of Case: Putative Class Action alleging a product defect
Electronic Data Involved: Emails
Key Insight: Where, prior to being named a party to the action, defendant failed to preserve ESI (including failing to pay a vendor for imaging her hard drive, which resulted in the vendor’s destruction of the image) despite the receipt of two subpoenas, where the court found the spoliation to be at least willful, and where the circumstances surrounding the spoliation permitted an inference that the information destroyed was highly relevant to the litigation, court found an entry of default was appropriate and set a hearing to determine the appropriate damages
Nature of Case: Tortious interference with a contract, breach of contract, defamation, etc. arising from anonymous emails sent to several parties
Electronic Data Involved: ESI, hard drive
Key Insight: Court denied motion to reverse conviction based on state?s failure to preserve evidence despite defendant?s alleged express written request to do so where, because the contents of the audio and visual tapes at issue was unknown, evidence of bad faith was required and where no such evidence was presented; the court indicated: ?The record indicates that the officers were acting in good faith in accordance with their normal practices when the tapes were destroyed.?
Nature of Case: Criminal
Electronic Data Involved: Audio and visual tapes related to arrest, etc.
Key Insight: Court declined to impose spoliation sanctions for destruction of original microfiche where the destruction occurred in a somewhat unique situation ( the crate of microfiche was destroyed after becoming an ?orphan sitting in a warehouse? after being shipped back to England) and where ?nothing of value was lost? because the originals had been digitally copied
Electronic Data Involved: Original microfiche
Key Insight: Despite acknowledging defendant?s failure to implement a litigation hold until at least 5 years after it first anticipated litigation, the court denied plaintiff?s motion for sanctions where the quantity and quality of the documents produced by defendant established that relevant information was ?diligently preserved? pursuant to defendant?s document retention policy and where plaintiff failed to establish that it had been prejudiced or that its ability to effectively prepare for trial had been impeded
Nature of Case: Hatch-Waxman patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: ESI, emails
Key Insight: For defendants? discovery abuses, including spoliation or withholding of audio tapes of wiretapped conversations despite a court order to produce them; destruction of relevant hard drives and refusal to authorize release of copies of those drives from a third-party; and failure to produce other relevant evidence, court found that plaintiff had been prejudiced and ordered default sanctions
Nature of Case: Claims arising from fraudulent scheme to recover insurance reimbursements
Electronic Data Involved: Audio tapes, hard drives
Key Insight: Upon plaintiff?s showing of good cause, court granted motion for expedited discovery to issue a subpoena to the relevant ISP seeking identifying information regarding one unknown defendant (Doe 1) but denied the motion as to the remaining 100 Does because of improper joinder
Nature of Case: Copyright infringement
Electronic Data Involved: Identifying information for ISP subscriber
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.