Tag:Deleted Data

1
In re Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. Research Reports Sec. Litig., 2004 WL 305601 (S.D.N.Y Feb. 18, 2004)
2
Metro. Opera Ass?n, Inc. v. Local 100, 2004 WL 1943099 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2004)
3
MPCT Solutions Corp. v. Methe, 1999 WL 495115 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 1999)
4
Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 2004 WL 5326424 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Sept. 27, 2004)
5
Pennar Software Corp. v. Fortune 500 Sys., Ltd., 51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 279, 2001 WL 1319162 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2001)
6
RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)
7
Samide v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 773 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
8
Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2004 WL 1837997 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2004)
9
Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 669 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
10
Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2004 WL 417193 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 30, 2004)

In re Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. Research Reports Sec. Litig., 2004 WL 305601 (S.D.N.Y Feb. 18, 2004)

Key Insight: Where defendants avowed that they were aware of their obligations and have taken and are continuing to take all necessary steps to preserve all potentially relevant electronic evidence, court determined there was no “imminent risk” that any deleted data would be overwritten and rendered irretrievable, and denied plaintiffs’ motion for order lifting automatic stay on discovery for purpose of preserving and restoring deleted email

Nature of Case: Securities class action

Electronic Data Involved: Email allegedly deleted by individual defendant and his subordinates

Metro. Opera Ass?n, Inc. v. Local 100, 2004 WL 1943099 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2004)

Key Insight: On defendant’s motion for reconsideration, court again described numerous discovery failings by the defendants, concluded that it would adhere to its prior decision at 212 F.R.D. 178, and further rejected two new arguments belatedly advanced by defendant relating the merits of plaintiff’s underlying claims

Nature of Case: Opera company sued union

Electronic Data Involved: Email and electronic documents; hard drives

MPCT Solutions Corp. v. Methe, 1999 WL 495115 (N.D. Ill. July 2, 1999)

Key Insight: Sanctions in form of preliminary injunction preventing defendant from contacting MPCT clients granted, after defendant violated preservation order by deleting documents from laptop and defragmenting hard drive, thus preventing the recovery of deleted data

Nature of Case: Enforcement of non-competition agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents stored on laptop

Pennar Software Corp. v. Fortune 500 Sys., Ltd., 51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 279, 2001 WL 1319162 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2001)

Key Insight: Defendant’s discovery abuses and deletion of web site pages and other electronic information warranted entry of order enjoining spoliation and imposing monetary sanctions against defendant

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Web site pages; log files and backup tapes of nonparty web hosting company

RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)

Key Insight: Court granted emergency motion to compel, requiring defendants to appear for deposition and produce computers for inspection by plaintiff’s computer forensics expert; at subsequent bench trial, in light of defendants’ deletion of data from computers after litigation commenced, repeated defragmentation of hard drives prior to court-ordered inspections, and decision not to offer any testimony to explain same, court drew adverse inference; court awarded plaintiff $100,000 as royalty for defendants’ unauthorized use of trade secrets, and $150,000 in punitive damages for the willful and malicious misappropriation of trade secrets and attempted cover-up

Nature of Case: Manufacturer sued former employee and competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Software and databases containing sales and customer information

Samide v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 773 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Key Insight: Court modified prior order directing defendants to produce contents of hard drives for in camera inspection; individual defendants now directed to produce hard copies of all emails relating to allegations against certain individual, including any deleted emails recovered by a qualified expert appointed by the referee supervising the discovery; only those emails that in fact deal with relevant allegations to be turned over to the plaintiff; plaintiff agreed to bear all costs related to recovery of data from hard drive

Nature of Case: Sex discrimination, negligent supervision and breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Email and deleted email on hard drives of individual defendants

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

Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 669 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Key Insight: Order allowing plaintiff unrestricted access to defendant’s computer system quashed, because the order allowed plaintiff unrestricted access to defendant’s computer system, including all of his programs and directories, without protection for any privileged or confidential information and without safeguards or restrictions to minimize any potential harm to the computer system

Nature of Case: Breach of contract suit between former partners

Electronic Data Involved: Inspection of computer system to search for financial information

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

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