Discoverability Scope, Including FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope (Prior to Dec. 1, 2015) – Page 17

Cahill v. Doe, 879 A.2d 943 (Del. Super. Ct. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied John Doe’s motion for protective order preventing internet service provider from disclosing his identity, finding that (1) plaintiffs had, in good faith, alleged that John Doe had used the internet as a tool for defamation, (2) the identifying information sought was directly and materially related to thir claim, and (3) the information could not be obtained from any other source

Nature of Case: Elected town council member and wife sued anonymous user of an internet “blog” who posted defamatory statements about plaintiffs on blog

Electronic Data Involved: Blog posting

McDougal-Wilson v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 232 F.R.D. 246 (E.D.N.C. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant to produce (among other things) computer generated employee profiles of all its employees in North Carolina from 1995 to the present, finding that producing records of over 1,000 employees who were not similarly situated to plaintiff would be unduly burdensome and oppressive and was unlikely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computer generated employee profiles

In re Lowe’s Companies, Inc., 134 S.W.3d 876 (Tex. App. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Trial court’s order requiring witness to bring with her a computer or have access at the time of her deposition to a computer capable of logging onto the database and capable of searching, sorting and printing the data on the computer as requested by plaintiff’s counsel in the deposition was overbroad and vacated; however, witness would be required to testify about database since defendant had failed to establish that database was a trade secret

Nature of Case: Personal injury from falling merchandise

Electronic Data Involved: Database re accidents and injuries occurring at Lowe’s stores

York v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31465306 (N.D. Okla. Nov. 4, 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Defendant required to produce documents regarding use of software program and designate Rule 30(b)(6) witness to testify about defendant’s use of software program; defendant allowed to submit protective order “to safeguard divulgence of such information to third parties”

Nature of Case: Insurance bad faith

Electronic Data Involved: Colossus computer software program used by insurance industry to evaluate claims

Murlas Living Trust v. Mobil Oil Corp., 1995 WL 124186 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 20, 1999)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Defendant not required to produce entire database; defendant ordered to re-search database for information relevant to subject property and if further information found, to produce it

Nature of Case: Lessor sued for contract breach and related claims stemming from leaking underground storage tank

Electronic Data Involved: Database containing information re facilities with leaking underground storage tanks

Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Order compelling defendant surgeon to produce his surgical database, to include information related to all the cholecystectomy procedures defendant had ever performed (with the patient names redacted) was abuse of discretion; matter remanded with directions that the court examine the database contents in camera to determine relevance and privilege issues

Nature of Case: Medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: Surgical database maintained by defendant surgeon

Adams v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 54 F.R.D. 220 (W.D. Va. 1972)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of defendant’s current computerized master payroll file and all computer print-outs for W-2 forms of defendant’s employees, given accuracy of records and inexpensiveness of production

Nature of Case: Race discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized master payroll file

Nicholas v. Windham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion to deny enforcement of subpoena directed to plaintiffs’ nonparty company where defendants had already deposed plaintiffs and conceded that the company would have no additional information, plaintiffs would be designated Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses if discovery were allowed, and plaintiffs had already produced email from their business accounts and remained under a continuing obligation to supplement their earlier productions

Nature of Case: Ancillary proceeding to enforce subpoena

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Allen v. Armstrong, 2004 WL 1533934 (D. Conn. Apr. 5, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Order memorialized parties’ agreement regarding motion to compel: defendants agreed to produce all emails that exist in printed form, but would not conduct search of electronic database to retrieve emails since it would be cost prohibitive; defendant understood it would be precluded from offering evidence at trial that was not properly disclosed in discovery

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Email

In re Propulsid Prods. Liab. Litig., 2003 WL 22174137 (E.D. La. Sept. 9, 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Brief reference to court’s earlier order narrowing the scope of subpoena to hard copy documents only, rather than including production of electronic documents

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic production of documents

Tag:Discoverability Scope, Including FRCP 26(b)(1) Scope (Prior to Dec. 1, 2015)