Motion to Compel – Page 129 – Electronic Discovery Law

Frye v. St. Thomas Health Servs., Inc., 2005 WL 5417506 (Tenn. Cir. Ct. Mar. 30, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied motion to compel production of defendant’s hard drives so that plaintiff’s computer forensics expert could search them for deleted emails since there was no evidence that defendant had consciously or purposely deleted emails and plaintiff had only “suspicions and allegations” which did not justify the costly and burdensome search requested

Nature of Case: Age discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Deleted email

McCarthy v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp., 2005 WL 6157347 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. June 9, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Where plaintiff?s affidavit in support of motion stated that emails were used routinely in the course of defendants’ business, described defendants? backup process, and asserted that he was able to run a search on Lotus Notes folders he maintained, resulting in production by him to defendants of 5,000 emails, and defendants provided little information except to state that backup tapes were routinely overwritten and that deleted emails could not be recovered, court noted that defendants? efforts to preserve evidence or lack thereof could be an issue in the case and allowed plaintiff to designate IT expert to inspect hard drives and backup media identified in discovery demands; court further directed defendants to provide access, subject to inspection protocol and confidentiality stipulation to be submitted by parties for court approval

Nature of Case: Disability discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Emails, hard drives

Okoumou v. Safe Horizon, 2005 WL 2431674 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Although plaintiff was free to pursue discovery of archived emails on obsolete email system, the extent to which those emails were discoverable and the allocation of costs to restore them would require further analysis; court directed plaintiff to notify the court if she intended to pursue the archived email

Nature of Case: Wrongful termination

Electronic Data Involved: Archived email from obsolete email system

Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Purdue Frederick Co., 2005 WL 3511085 (Conn. Super. Ct. Nov. 30, 2005) (Unpublished)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Deciding there should be a presumption in favor of finding inadvertence, court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel production of privileged documents “recalled” by defendant under stipulated inadvertent production provision; court further advised that (1) production of documents without any privilege review whatsoever is not an inadvertent, but rather a purposeful, act unless the parties had an agreement otherwise; and (2) the purpose of the parties’ inadvertent production provision was not to allow the producing party to consciously change its mind post-production about whether or not to claim the privilege

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Privileged email

Davila v. Patel, 2005 WL 2248350 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 13, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court ordered defendants to produce American College of Radiology reports during certain time frame, to produce all information pertaining to plaintiff contained in, or retrievable from, their computer systems, and, if requested by the United States, to make available for deposition persons with knowledge of the computer system maintained by hospital during certain time frame

Nature of Case: Medical malpractice

Electronic Data Involved: All information pertaining to plaintiff contained in, or retrievable from, defendants’ computer systems

In re Natural Gas Commodity Litig., 2005 WL 3036505 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court narrowed scope of subpoena and ordered plaintiff and third party to negotiate a reasonable “sample” protocol and search protocol to expedite production, limit the burden and perhaps develop information to return to court to refine the court’s ruling

Nature of Case: Securities class action

Electronic Data Involved: Spreadsheets

Jinks-Umstead v. England, 232 F.R.D. 142 (D.D.C. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to reject defendant’s attorney-client privilege and work product claims, finding that crime/fraud exception did not apply, that defendant had not waived privilege, and that plaintiff had not demonstrated a substantial need for the material; court also noted that defendant had previously been sanctioned for the discovery conduct complained of and that it would be inappropriate to sanction defendant again for the very same conduct

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Drafts of discovery responses and email claimed to be privileged

Bd. of Managers of Atrium Condo. v. West 79th St. Corp., 792 N.Y.S.2d 444 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied defendant’s request for “electronic discovery of plaintiff’s attorneys’ computers” to determine whether affidavit of service of reply brief was backdated

Electronic Data Involved: Plaintiff’s counsel’s computers

McDougal-Wilson v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 232 F.R.D. 246 (E.D.N.C. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant to produce (among other things) computer generated employee profiles of all its employees in North Carolina from 1995 to the present, finding that producing records of over 1,000 employees who were not similarly situated to plaintiff would be unduly burdensome and oppressive and was unlikely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: Computer generated employee profiles

Papyrus Tech. Corp. v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc., 2005 WL 1606059 (S.D.N.Y. July 7, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of additional computer files denied where plaintiff offered no basis either for excusing delay or for deeming the files in question to be so significant as to justify reopening discovery more than five months after its close

Electronic Data Involved: Computer files

Tag:Motion to Compel