Tag:Motion for Sanctions

1
Spencer v. Lunada Bad Boys, 2018 WL 839862, No. 16-cv-02129-SJO-RAO (C.D. Cal., 2018)
2
Hernandez v. Tulare County Correction Center, No. 16-CV-00413 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2018)
3
ML Healthcare Services v. Publix Super Markets (11th Cir., 2018)
4
Benedict v. Hankook Tire (E.D. Va., 2018)
5
Kische v. Simsek (Western District of Washington, 2018)
6
Waymo LLC v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2018)
7
Brown v. Sam?s West Inc. (Nevada District, 2018)
8
Klipsch Group, Inc. v. ePRO E-Commerce Ltd., No. 16-3637-cv (L) (2nd Cir. Jan. 25, 2018)
9
Dotson, et al. v. Edmonson, et al., No. 16-15371 (E.D. La. Jan. 22, 2018)
10
Cordoba v. Pulido (N.D. Cal., 2018)

Spencer v. Lunada Bad Boys, 2018 WL 839862, No. 16-cv-02129-SJO-RAO (C.D. Cal., 2018)

Key Insight: 4 deleted messages were lost, as they could not be recovered from other defendants

Nature of Case: right to surf free from harassment

Electronic Data Involved: text messages

Keywords: spoliation, duty to preserve

View Case Opinion

Hernandez v. Tulare County Correction Center, No. 16-CV-00413 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 8, 2018)

Key Insight: spoliation sanctions

Nature of Case: ? 1983 civil rights action

Electronic Data Involved: videos, photographs

Keywords: spoliation, intent to deprive, 37(e)(2),negligence, prejudice 37(e)(1), duty to preserve

View Case Opinion

ML Healthcare Services v. Publix Super Markets (11th Cir., 2018)

Key Insight: whether non-movant acted in bad faith or with the intent to deprive

Nature of Case: personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: surveillance video

Keywords: Eleventh Circuit, crucial, bad faith, usual course of business, broad and far-reaching request

View Case Opinion

Benedict v. Hankook Tire (E.D. Va., 2018)

Key Insight: Rule 37(e) governs, an expert may not opine on what a party may/may not or should/should not have done

Nature of Case: Products liability

Electronic Data Involved: business documents

Keywords: Expert, 37(e), spoliation sanctions

View Case Opinion

Kische v. Simsek (Western District of Washington, 2018)

Key Insight: Courts have inherent authority and FRCP 37 to apply sanctions for spoliation and the inherent authority analysis (which the court used in this case) is much the same as FRCP 37

Nature of Case: Trademark infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data generally (EDI records, Quickbook files, passwords, sales data)

Keywords: Turkey, women’s apparel, Lanham act

Identified Local Court Rule(s): W.D. Wash. LCR 7

View Case Opinion

Waymo LLC v. Uber Techs., Inc., No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA (N.D. Cal. Jan. 30, 2018)

Key Insight: Intent must be proved for adverse inference sanction, “evilness” of corporation not at issue

Nature of Case: Trade secret misappropriation

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic records

Keywords: Uber, evil corporation, trade secret, imagination, spoliation, Academy Award

View Case Opinion

Brown v. Sam?s West Inc. (Nevada District, 2018)

Key Insight: Adverse inference instruct sanction correct because party failed to preserve video evidence when overhauling system

Nature of Case: sip and fall, premises liability

Electronic Data Involved: video

Keywords: adverse inference instructions, culpable state of mind, destroying video

View Case Opinion

Klipsch Group, Inc. v. ePRO E-Commerce Ltd., No. 16-3637-cv (L) (2nd Cir. Jan. 25, 2018)

Key Insight: Intentional spoliation/persistent discovery misconduct can lead to sanctions well above the amount in dispute

Nature of Case: Intellectual Property (trademark infringement/counterfeit)

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Keywords: Sanctions, proportionality, willfully, adverse inference

View Case Opinion

Dotson, et al. v. Edmonson, et al., No. 16-15371 (E.D. La. Jan. 22, 2018)

Key Insight: Defendants turned in employer owned/funded cell phones a month after litigation filed; was not spoilation and no sanctions given

Nature of Case: Civil Rights Violation

Electronic Data Involved: Cell Phone Records

Keywords: spoilation, duty of preservation

View Case Opinion

Cordoba v. Pulido (N.D. Cal., 2018)

Key Insight: whether a permissive adverse inference instruction should be permitted; if so, whether spoliating party should be permitted to offer evidence to justify spoliation

Nature of Case: sexual harassment/abuse

Electronic Data Involved: hard copy

Keywords: permissive adverse inference, permitting spoliating party to explain, negligent failure to preserve

View Case Opinion

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