Tag:Lack of Cooperation / Inaccurate Representations

1
Ferrero v. Henderson, 2004 WL 1802134 (S.D. Ohio July 28, 2005)
2
Krausz Puente LLC v. Westall, 2005 WL 236862 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 25, 2005) (Unpublished)
3
United States v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 374 F.3d 281 (5th Cir. 2004), rev’d, 125 S.Ct. 2129 (2005)
4
Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2005 WL 1398641 (N.D. Cal. June 14, 2005) (Unpublished)
5
Appraisal Mgmt. Co. III v. FNC, Inc., 2005 WL 3088561 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 17, 2005)
6
Nat’l Assoc. of Radiation Survivors v. Turnage, 115 F.R.D. 543 (N.D. Cal. 1987)
7
United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 327 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.D.C. 2004)
8
R.S. Creative, Inc. v. Creative Cotton, Ltd., 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 353 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)
9
Go2Net, Inc. v. C I Host, Inc., 60 P.3d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003)
10
Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)

Ferrero v. Henderson, 2004 WL 1802134 (S.D. Ohio July 28, 2005)

Key Insight: Where parties had settled the amount of attorney fees to be paid to plaintiff as sanction for defendant’s failure to produce crucial payroll records until first day of trial, court reconsidered and withdrew finding of bad faith on part of defense counsel since she had made at least some effort to reasonably investigate, and the failure to produce the material was blamed on two employees in defendant’s HR department

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination, FMLA claim

Electronic Data Involved: Payroll data

Krausz Puente LLC v. Westall, 2005 WL 236862 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 25, 2005) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Trial judge did not err in imposing monetary sanctions and evidentiary sanction against individual defendant limiting the scope of his testimony, where defendant delayed for several days and deleted relevant computer files in violation of court’s order requiring defendant to “immediately make available to Plaintiff’s designated expert all computers, including hard drives and all other electronic storage media in [defendant’s] possession, custody and/or control”

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and fraud

Electronic Data Involved: 5,300 computer files

United States v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 374 F.3d 281 (5th Cir. 2004), rev’d, 125 S.Ct. 2129 (2005)

Key Insight: Conviction of Arthur Anderson for obstructing an official proceeding of the SEC affirmed; conviction was based on government’s allegations that, in order to protect the firm and the firm’s largest single account (Enron), Anderson ordered a mass destruction of documents to keep them from the hands of the SEC; Anderson unsuccessfully attempted to cloak the destruction of documents under the auspices of its document retention policies

Nature of Case: Criminal charge of obstructing an official proceeding of the SEC

Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard copy documents

Advantacare Health Partners, LP v. Access IV, 2005 WL 1398641 (N.D. Cal. June 14, 2005) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Court denied individual defendant’s motion for reconsideration of default judgment entered against her and other defendants for continued destruction of evidence and continued possession of plaintiff’s proprietary files; although there was no evidence that individual defendant personally engaged in wrongful acts, she was not insulated by simply leaving compliance with court orders to other defendant; further, individual had numerous opportunities to disavow knowledge of misconduct or detail what efforts she personally took to comply with court orders but never did so

Nature of Case: Misapproriation of trade secrets and related torts

Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary information in electronic form

Appraisal Mgmt. Co. III v. FNC, Inc., 2005 WL 3088561 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 17, 2005)

Key Insight: Court dismissed complaint as discovery sanction finding that: (1) plaintiff’s failure to cooperate in discovery was willful, (2) plaintiff’s conduct had prejudiced the defendant by impairing its ability to prepare its defense, (3) plaintiff had received sufficient warnings that its failure to cooperate could lead to dismissal, and (4) lesser sanctions would not protect the integrity of pretrial procedures or ameliorate the prejudice already visited upon the defendant

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Email and computer code

Nat’l Assoc. of Radiation Survivors v. Turnage, 115 F.R.D. 543 (N.D. Cal. 1987)

Key Insight: Failure to produce computer data and other discovery abuses warranted imposition of monetary sanctions against defendant ($105,000 paid to plaintiffs and $15,000 paid to clerk of court “for the unnecessary consumption of the court’s time and resources”) and appointment of special master at defendant’s expense for purpose of monitoring its compliance with all further discovery

Nature of Case: Class action brought by veterans for alleged exposure to radiation during service with armed forces

Electronic Data Involved: Two V.A. computer systems (databases)

United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 327 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.D.C. 2004)

Key Insight: Finding it “astounding” that defendant’s employees failed to follow court’s preservation order and defendant’s own document retention policies, court rejected plaintiff’s request for adverse inference but imposed monetary sanction of $2,750,000 and barred testimony from at least 11 witnesses who failed to comply with defendant’s own internal document retention program

Nature of Case: Tobacco litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Email

R.S. Creative, Inc. v. Creative Cotton, Ltd., 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 353 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)

Key Insight: Trial court properly imposed terminating sanctions against plaintiff for egregious discovery abuses, including the deletion of files from hard drives after plaintiff had stipulated that computers and diskettes would not be operated or touched until defendants’ computer expert could examine them

Nature of Case: Breach of contract

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive, computer files

Go2Net, Inc. v. C I Host, Inc., 60 P.3d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003)

Key Insight: Motion for reconsideration of order granting of summary judgment properly denied where party failed to show that email from repaired server that was produced the day before summary judgment hearing qualified as “newly discovered evidence”

Nature of Case: Action to enforce advertising agreements

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Oved & Assocs. Const. Servs., Inc. v. Superior Court, 2003 WL 23028903 (Cal. App. Dec. 30, 2003) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Petition for writ of mandate denied; based on evidence that a business computer was used for accounting and nothing else, and that there was a risk the hard drive might be purged, trial court acted properly when it ordered the petitioner to produce the computer’s hard drive

Nature of Case: Misappropriation of funds

Electronic Data Involved: Hard drive

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.