Data Preservation – Page 87 – Electronic Discovery Law

Eckhardt v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2008 WL 1995310 (W.D.N.C. May 6, 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: Where plaintiff established through deposition testimony that discoverable documents existed which had not been produced, but court found no bad faith, court declined to give adverse inference instruction and instead allowed plaintiff to seek missing documents from backup tapes and to corroborate substance of any missing documents from witnesses where documents themselves could be recovered

Nature of Case: Alleged violations of Americans with Disabilities Act

Electronic Data Involved: Email; backup tapes

Super Future Equities, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A., 2008 WL 3261095 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 8, 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: For plaintiff?s and its principals? egregious discovery abuses and bad faith conduct, including intentional spoliation of ESI and willful deception and concealment, magistrate judge set out findings of fact and conclusions of law and recommended sanctions in form of adverse inference instruction and monetary sanctions representing all of defendants? fees and costs incurred in connection with sanctions motion; district court overruled plaintiff’s objections and adopted magistrate judge?s rulings

Nature of Case: Breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, RICO violations, negligence, gross negligence and injunctive relief

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drives, DVD, various ESI

Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-4, 589 F. Supp. 2d 151 (D. Conn. 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: Court granted plaintiffs? motion to for leave to take expedited discovery from defendants? internet service providers (two universities) for purpose of identifying Doe defendants where information sought was necessary for continued prosecution of the litigation and where narrowly tailored requests would reduce if not eliminate any prejudice to defendants; court limited discovery to defendants? directory information and MAC (media access control) addresses and provided defendants opportunity to object

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: ISP directory information, MAC addresses

E.E.O.C. v. Beauty Enters., Inc., 2008 WL 3359252 (D. Conn. Aug. 8, 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: Where plaintiffs argued that several BEI supervisors had testified they had not been instructed to preserve documents related to case, court agreed that defense counsel?s litigation hold letter was privileged and ordered BEI to disclose date on which letter was sent and names of recipients

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Letter from BEI’s counsel to BEI supervisors advising them to implement a litigation hold

Anderson v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 2008 WL 4816620 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: Plaintiff?s motion for contempt sanctions for discovery abuse denied where defendant indicated no documents responsive to subpoena existed, where search for documents entailed ?paper files, electronic files, hard drives, archives, computers, etc.?, where search was performed in presence of defendant?s paralegal and where defendant hired a contractor to search for archived emails but still found nothing; court found plaintiff?s reliance on ?passing statement? regarding email communication at deposition ?insufficient to prove that the purported emails ever existed?

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: ESI, email

Huthnance v. D.C., 255 F.R.D. 285 (D.D.C. 2008)

Dec 01 2008

Key Insight: Where defendants? radio log indicated a relevant communication occurred but where defendants were unable to produce the audio tape, court ordered defendant to produce its document retention policies to show ?whether the [communications] were maintained according to standard procedure?

Nature of Case: Claims arising from alleged illegal arrest and detention

Electronic Data Involved: Audio tapes of phonecalls, access to

Heartland Surgical Specialty Hosp., LLC v. Midwest Div., Inc., 2007 WL 1054279 (D. Kan. Apr. 9, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Where corporate designee could not fully answer questions regarding certain topics listed in Rule 30(b)(6) notice pertaining to plaintiff?s computer servers, software, data storage and retention, or plaintiff?s efforts to search for responsive email and documents, and did not know ?exactly how [the e-discovery vendor] searched? plaintiff?s servers or ?what all was on? the CD that was produced to defendants, court found that witness was inadequately prepared and ordered plaintiff to produce a supplemental Rule 30(b)(6) witness on those topics

Nature of Case: Antitrust and tortious interference litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Email; hardware and software; systems information

Perez-Farias v. Global Horizons, Inc., 2007 WL 2327073 (E.D. Wash. Aug. 10, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Where defendants failed to produce email, failed to properly preserve email, and had not complied with orders to timely produce discovery, nor paid plaintiffs’ costs of bringing discovery motions as ordered nor paid sanctions to court as directed, and repeatedly failed to follow local rules with respect to timely and properly filing documents, court granted plaintiff’s motion for case dispositive sanctions; trial would be on the issue of damages only, and only plaintiff’s evidence would be admitted given defendants’ failure to file witness or exhibit lists

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Muro v. Target Corp., 2007 WL 3254463 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 2, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: District court upheld magistrate judge?s ruling that Target’s ?litigation hold? notices were subject to attorney-client privilege and work product protection since notices were communications of legal advice from corporate counsel to corporate employees regarding document preservation; however, court sustained objection to magistrate’s ruling that privilege log was inadequate for failing to separately itemize each individual email quoted in an email string, concluding that Rule 26(b)(5)(A) does not require separate itemization of each individual email quoted in an email string

Nature of Case: Putative class action alleging violations of Truth in Lending Act

Electronic Data Involved: Litigation hold notices; privileged email

Reino de Espana v. Am. Bureau of Shipping, 2007 WL 1686327 (S.D.N.Y. June 6, 2007)

Dec 01 2007

Key Insight: Declining to grant sanction of dismissal since there was insufficient evidence of intentional or bad faith conduct, or adverse inference instruction since it was unclear how relevant the missing email was, court awarded monetary sanctions since Spain?s failure to timely implement adequate litigation hold and failure to conduct timely and diligent search for electronic discovery was negligent and resulted in loss of email; court further directed Spain to complete its forensic search for email records and produce such records on rolling basis

Nature of Case: Litigation brought by the government of Spain arising from shipping casualty and oil spill

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Tag:Data Preservation