Spoliation – Page 101 – Electronic Discovery Law

Larson v. Bank One Corp., 2005 WL 4652509 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 18, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Where defendant breached its duty to preserve by failing to establish a “comprehensive document retention policy” and by failing to properly disseminate the policy to its employees, and conduct evinced ?extraordinarily poor judgment? and ?gross negligence” but not willfulness or bad faith, magistrate recommended that prejudice to plaintiff could be remedied by precluding defendant from cross-examining plaintiff’s financial expert and by instructing the jury about the sanction

Nature of Case: Securities class action

Electronic Data Involved: Underlying data and calculations

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Haugen, 2003 WL 22080734 (D. Utah Aug. 19, 2003), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, and remanded, 427 F.3d 727 (10th Cir. 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Court granted defendants’ motion for sanctions and dismissed case with prejudice because, among other things, plaintiffs had failed to preserve relevant electronic data that plaintiffs knew were critical, and it would be impossible for defendants to defend the case without the electronic data that was not produced and no longer available

Nature of Case: Business sued competitors for defamation and unfair competition

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Aero Products Int’l, Inc. v. Intex Recreation Corp., 2005 WL 4954351 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 11, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Denying defendant’s motion for a new trial, court concluded that adverse inference jury instruction based upon defendant’s mistaken failure to suspend document retention policy that deleted email every 30 days was not misleading or unduly prejudicial

Nature of Case: Patent infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Email

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

Invision Media Communications, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co., 2004 WL 396037 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Plaintiff?s discovery misconduct, including disregard of discovery obligations, misleading statements regarding existence and location of evidence and failure to make reasonable inquiries, warranted sanctions in the form of costs and reasonable attorneys? fees expended by defendant in connection with sanctions motion and certain discovery events

Nature of Case: Insurance coverage

Electronic Data Involved: Email and hard drives

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

Dec 01 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

Jackson v. Microsoft Corp., 211 F.R.D. 423 (W.D. Wash. 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Plaintiff’s misconduct and discovery abuse (including obtaining email and proprietary information of employer, paying for such material, copying and using material to prepare case, and engaging in elaborate series of lies during depositions and evidentiary hearings re same) warranted dismissal with prejudice

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination

Electronic Data Involved: CDs and laptop computer hard drive

RKI, Inc. v. Grimes, 177 F. Supp. 2d 859 (N.D. Ill. 2001)

Dec 01 2004

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

Katt v. Titan Acquisitions, Inc., 244 F. Supp. 2d 841 (M.D. Tenn. 2003)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Despite dismissal of all plaintiffs’ claims and entry of final judgment on the merits, court retained ancillary jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions for spoliation of electronic evidence for purpose of holding a hearing before ruling on the motion

Nature of Case: Securities class action

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic evidence

Stevenson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 354 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Adverse inference jury instruction against defendant for its prelitigation destruction of tape-recorded voice radio communications between train crew and dispatchers on date of collision was proper, but refusal to permit testimony offered by defendant to rebut the adverse inference was abuse of discretion

Nature of Case: Negligence

Electronic Data Involved: Tape-recorded voice radio communications

Tag:Spoliation