Tag:Motion for Protective Order

1
Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 2004 WL 1949062 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2004) (Unpublished)
2
Xpedior Creditor Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc., 2003 WL 22283835 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2003)
3
City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2004)
4
Lytle v. Ford Motor Co., 2003 WL 23855089 (Ind. Cir. Ct. Apr. 19, 2003) (Unpublished)
5
York v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 2002 WL 31465306 (N.D. Okla. Nov. 4, 2002)
6
Cobell v. Norton, 206 F.R.D. 324 (D.D.C. 2002)
7
Multitechnology Servs., L.P. v. Verizon Southwest, 2004 WL 1553480 (N.D. Tex. July 12, 2004)
8
Youle v. Ryan, 811 N.E.2d 1281 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004)
9
Computer Assoc. Int’l v. Quest Software, Inc., 56 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 401, 2003 WL 21277129 (N.D. Ill. June 3, 2003)
10
Nicholas v. Windham Int’l, Inc., 373 F.3d 537 (4th Cir. 2004)

Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 2004 WL 1949062 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2004) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Noting differences between federal law and New York law regarding cost-shifting in discovery, court stated it did not have sufficient information about the costs associated with the requested discovery, but concluded that until plaintiffs indicated a willingness to pay for the requested electronic discovery (whatever its cost), court would not order its production

Nature of Case: Claims based on breach of contract and for an accounting

Electronic Data Involved: Computer data

Xpedior Creditor Trust v. Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc., 2003 WL 22283835 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2003)

Key Insight: Motion for protective order requiring plaintiff to share the cost of restoring computer files denied; Zubulake judge applied Zubulake factors and concluded that cost-shifting was not appropriate

Nature of Case: Breach of contract class action

Electronic Data Involved: Computer files housed on decommissioned systems

City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2004)

Key Insight: Court denied BATF’s motion to quash subpoenas since firearms tracing and licensing data maintained by BATF in federal databases was relevant and would be subject to a confidentiality order, and disclosure of the data was not precluded by appropriations statute or by law enforcement privilege

Nature of Case: City and families of shooting victims sued manufacturers, distributors and retailers of weapons

Electronic Data Involved: Database maintained by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Lytle v. Ford Motor Co., 2003 WL 23855089 (Ind. Cir. Ct. Apr. 19, 2003) (Unpublished)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s request “to go into Ford’s databases and look for any relevant information that might be there,” finding the request for production to be overbroad and unduly burdensome

Nature of Case: Product liability

Electronic Data Involved: Databases

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

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

Cobell v. Norton, 206 F.R.D. 324 (D.D.C. 2002)

Key Insight: Government’s motion for “protective order clarifying that it may produce email in response to discovery requests by producing from paper records of email messages rather than from backup tapes and may overwrite backup tapes in accordance with Departmental directives” denied as inappropriate given history of dispute; plaintiffs awarded attorneys’ fees and costs associated with motion

Nature of Case: Suit against the government alleging mismanagement of Indian trust funds

Electronic Data Involved: Email stored on backup tapes

Multitechnology Servs., L.P. v. Verizon Southwest, 2004 WL 1553480 (N.D. Tex. July 12, 2004)

Key Insight: Court ordered cost-shifting (50/50) where plaintiff sought information about Verizon’s past and present customers even though material was not “inaccessible” under Zubulake analysis, since data was available in Verizon’s computer databases or archives

Nature of Case: Breach of contract and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Computerized customer data

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

Computer Assoc. Int’l v. Quest Software, Inc., 56 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 401, 2003 WL 21277129 (N.D. Ill. June 3, 2003)

Key Insight: Applying the Rowe balancing test, court denied producing party’s motion to require requesting party to pay costs associated with computerized privilege review estimated to cost $28,000-40,000

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets

Electronic Data Involved: 8 hard drives

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

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