Key Insight: not ordered to reproduce production of documents in native format (with metadata) but only categories specifically requested by plaintiff
Nature of Case: wrongful termination – contract
Electronic Data Involved: email
Keywords: native format
Key Insight: No sanctions when electronically stored information is lost during ordinary course of business.
Nature of Case: Sanctions
Electronic Data Involved: electronically stored information
Keywords: Safe harbor, Rule 37(e), good faith, normal course of business, spoiliation
Key Insight: Plaintiff unsuccessfully seeks injunction to prevent destruction of certain evidence. Defendants argued that sanctions would be inappropriate and no spoliation had occurred.
Nature of Case: Inmate pro se plaintiff asserts a host of constitutional violations against the U.S. and individual prison personnel.
Electronic Data Involved: Deleted video footage.
Keywords: Failure to preserve, destruction of evidence, spoliation, adverse inference.
Key Insight: Magistrate recommended sanctions for defendants’ willful failure to comply with his discovery order. No finding of bad faith.
Nature of Case: Breach of contract.
Electronic Data Involved: Defendant emails and text messages.
Keywords: “Strong circumstantial evidence” that the defendants had concealed documents. Adverse inference instructions and legal costs imposed by court.
Key Insight: Failure to preserve relevant evidence.
Nature of Case: Trademark ownership dispute.
Electronic Data Involved: Defendants discarded computers, following an alleged power surge which “fried” data.
Keywords: Defendants “willfully spoliated evidence” and the “extraordinary measures Batterman undertook to mislead opposing counsel and the Court merit a finding of bad faith.”
Key Insight: whether defendants acted with prejudice in not preserving “loop type system” video footage; whether spoliation sanctions apply for destroyed evidence
Nature of Case: Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference and excessive force (cruel and unusual punishment)
Electronic Data Involved: medical records
Keywords: spoliation, preserve, prejudice, intent, bad faith, loop type system
Key Insight: are the defendants acting in bad faith by not confirming that evidence doesn’t exist or was it not preserved, in that case is it sanctionable
Nature of Case: violation of Securities act, violation of the exchange act and rule 10b-5, unregistered securities offerings
Electronic Data Involved: “back office data” information as to whether defendants explored public offering
Keywords: bad faith, sanctions, spoliation, public offering
Key Insight: if sanctions can be granted for inconsistent and incomplete response from opposing party
Nature of Case: violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law
Electronic Data Involved: initial interrogatories and verifications
Keywords: spoliation, sanctions, default judgment, defunct business, unreachable party
Key Insight: Where Plaintiff?s agent deleted an original voicemail from his phone by way of a factory reset but had produced a copy and also claimed to have transferred the voicemail to his new phone and where Defendants sought sanctions and argued that the deletion would prevent them from showing the voicemail was fabricated, as they suspected, the court declined to impose sanctions for the alleged fabrication, despite evidence the presentation of evidence that could lead to that conclusion, but did order that Plaintiff be prevented from using the voicemail at trial as a sanction for spoliation, reasoning that although the voicemail was not on one of Plaintiff?s phones (but rather on its agent?s), it ?likely? had a duty to preserve the evidence and that Plaintiff did not attempt to provide access to the phone or provide notice of the voicemail?s possible destruction
Nature of Case: Enforcement of Restrictive Covenants
Electronic Data Involved: Voicemail
Key Insight: Rejecting defendants? explanation that their failure to preserve was the result of a vendor?s refusal to continue assistance for the reason of non-payment, the court found that defendants? had a duty to preserve the information stored on the corporate server that began ?well before the vendor stopped providing services? and reasoned that it was defendants? obligation to ?take ?all necessary steps to guarantee that relevant data was both preserved and produced,?? and also found that defendants were ?at a minimum grossly negligent? for failing to preserve relevant evidence where there was no evidence of efforts to preserve a readable copy of the corporate server nor evidence that they sought modification of the freeze on their assets in able to make payments to the vendor; magistrate judge recommended sanction of an adverse inference
Nature of Case: Securities and Exchange Commission investigation (SEC)
Electronic Data Involved: Contents of corporate server / “back office data”
Copyright © 2022, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.