Key Insight: Is expedited discovery warranted, and how extensive can Twitch seek discovery on the bot company. Are the non-respnding defendants’ financial informations avle to be discovered?
Nature of Case: Trademark, Contract, unfair competition, cybersquatting
Electronic Data Involved: financial/billing information
Keywords: Immediate discovery, video games, internet, third party discovery
Key Insight: Plaintiff reset iPhone, shortly before sending to vendor for forensic examination. Previous sanctions had not proven to deter this activity and recommended dismissal of case.
Nature of Case: Wrongful Termination
Electronic Data Involved: iPhone Records
Keywords: spoliation; destruction; sanctions
Key Insight: Defendant had attempted to remove plaintiff as manager of two LLCs during divorce. Plantiff showed evidence of inconsistent metadata within defendant’s key documents. Court ruled defendant did not have right to remove plaintiff and documents showing otherwise were not reliable.
Nature of Case: Validity of Removal of Manager of LLC
Electronic Data Involved: LLC Agreements and Related Documents
Keywords: Metadata; Sanctions
Key Insight: email
Nature of Case: Family Business dispute
Electronic Data Involved: email
Keywords: Pattern of delinquent conduct; Complete disr4egard for court orders; failure to preserve; Zubulake
Key Insight: Plaintiff requested Defendant run 72 “spelling variations” of 5 terms allowed by prior court order. Court denied and allowed 20, but did not apply sanctions yet.
Nature of Case: Libel/Slander
Electronic Data Involved: Various ESI
Keywords: search terms; sanctions; cooperation
Key Insight: Party that does not dispute it spoliated ESI should be sanctioned
Nature of Case: consumer protection class action
Electronic Data Involved: deleted electronic records
Keywords: spoliation sanctions, deleted electronic records
Key Insight: Rule 37 does not directly address destruction of video footage.
Nature of Case: prisoner suicide
Electronic Data Involved: video footage, emails, text messages
Keywords: destruction video, spoliation video
Key Insight: inadequate search and production, misrepresentation, failure to supplement, follow-up, failure to disclose
Nature of Case: patent infringement
Electronic Data Involved: email, board meeting minutes, investor presentations
Keywords: monetary sanctions, needless burden, late disclosures, post-settlement order, misrepresentation, motion to show cause
Key Insight: Spoliation of evidence via a mobile device. Case filed prior to new Rule 37(e) enactment, so, rule does not apply.
Nature of Case: Fair Labor Standards Act violation
Electronic Data Involved: e-mail account records
Keywords: “old” bad faith analysis, misdirection and deception, 2-step verification.
Key Insight: Where Defendant failed to preserve relevant evidence for reasons including its failure to timely issue a litigation hold following receipt of a letter threatening litigation and its lack of understanding related to the migration of its data to a new archival system resulting in the loss of ESI (e.g., Defendant was notified of but failed to address an ?over limit folder problem? related to two custodians, failed to confirm that data had successfully migrated before instructing employees to delete information ,etc.) but where Defendant undertook SUBSTANTIAL efforts to address its discovery defects and Plaintiff was unable to identify any specific information that was lost (where much was received from third parties or eventually produced as a result of Defendant?s remedial efforts) or to establish an intent to deprive, the court declined to impose sanctions pursuant to recently amended Rule 37(e); instead, pursuant to Rule 37(a) the court ordered Defendant to reimburse Plaintiff?s reasonable attorney?s fees and expenses necessary to prepare and file their motion for sanctions; regarding Defendant?s lack of a document retention policies and potential loss of data before implementation of its archive after its duty to preserve was triggered, the court indicated that prejudice was ?speculative? but invited a motion from Plaintiff for ?evidentiary rulings? if desired
Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.