Tag:Lack of Cooperation / Inaccurate Representations

1
QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)
2
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
3
RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)
4
Sheppard v. River Valley Fitness One, LP, 203 F.R.D. 56 (D.N.H. 2001)
5
Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 669 So.2d 1142 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
6
Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 783 So.2d 1087 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
7
Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)
8
Uncle Henry’s Inc. v. Plaut Consulting, Inc., 2002 WL 31833139 (D. Me. Dec. 17, 2002)
9
United States v. IBM, 76 F.R.D. 97 (S.D.N.Y. 1977)
10
United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 327 F. Supp. 2d 21 (D.D.C. 2004)

QZO, Inc. v. Moyer, 594 S.E.2d 541(S.C. Ct. App. 2004)

Key Insight: No abuse of discretion for trial court to strike defendant’s answer and enter judgment for plaintiff on issue of liability, where defendant reformatted computer’s hard drive, effectively erasing any information the computer may have contained, a day before surrendering it for court-ordered inspection

Nature of Case: Dispute between former business partners

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop

Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)

Key Insight: Based on in camera review, court granted defendant’s motion to compel based on the crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege, ordered production of other documents on same subject matter and further ruled that discovery would be allowed regarding documents produced and on the issue of sanctions

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email, backup tapes

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

Sheppard v. River Valley Fitness One, LP, 203 F.R.D. 56 (D.N.H. 2001)

Key Insight: Defense counsel’s failure to produce computer records and to retain all drafts of settlement documents reflected lack of diligence rather than intentional effort to abuse discovery process; testimony of witness barred and $500 awarded as sanctions

Nature of Case: Sexual harassment

Electronic Data Involved: Computer records

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

Strasser v. Yalamanchi, 783 So.2d 1087 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Key Insight: Affirming jury award for plaintiff, where plaintiff had been permitted to add claim for negligent destruction of evidence based on defendant’s failure to preserve electronic records and computer hard drive, court found no error in allowing plaintiff to introduce at trial evidence of defendant’s discovery misconduct. Court further concluded that strong statements of disapproval of defendant’s discovery abuses did not require trial judge’s recusal.

Nature of Case: Breach of contract suit between former partners

Electronic Data Involved: Computer hard drive

Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2004), amending 341 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 543 U.S. 813 (2004)

Key Insight: Defendant’s subpoena to ISP of plaintiff, which sought all copies of all email sent or received by anyone at plaintiff with no limitation as to time or scope, was “massively overbroad,” “patently unlawful,” and “transparently and egregiously” violated federal rules; besides warranting sanctions in underlying suit, subpoena was grounds for separate action by employees of plaintiff against defendant for violation of federal Stored Communications Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and state law

Nature of Case: Violation of federal electronic privacy and computer fraud statutes

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored by Internet Service Provider

Uncle Henry’s Inc. v. Plaut Consulting, Inc., 2002 WL 31833139 (D. Me. Dec. 17, 2002)

Key Insight: Court rejected plaintiff’s motion to reconsider recommended decision on summary judgment and motion to supplement the record with additional electronic materials (including email) obtained from belatedly produced zip disk, since plaintiff failed to seek a continuance under Rule 56(f) and proffer came two months after receipt of electronic media and was therefore tardy

Nature of Case: Contract dispute

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic documents and email stored on “zip” disk

United States v. IBM, 76 F.R.D. 97 (S.D.N.Y. 1977)

Key Insight: Defendant required to produce computerized information; conduct of defendant and technical and complex nature of production warranted appointment of examiner pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 53 to report to the court what materials the defendant possesses and whether defendant produced such material

Nature of Case: Antitrust

Electronic Data Involved: Tapes, files, programs, reports, input and output files

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

Copyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.