Tag:Spoliation

1
Legacy, Inc. v. Tekserve POS, LLC, 2007 WL 772958 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 12, 2007)
2
In re Tri-State Armored Servs., Inc., 366 B.R. 326 (D.N.J. 2007)
3
Escobar v. City of Houston, 2007 WL 2900581 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 29, 2007)
4
Qantum Communications Corp. v. Star Broad., Inc., 473 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (S.D. Fla. 2007)
5
Bakhtiari v. Lutz, 2007 WL 3377215 (8th Cir. Nov. 15, 2007)
6
Network Sys. Architects Corp. v. Dimitruk, 2007 WL 4442349 (Mass. Super. Ct. Dec. 6, 2007)
7
United States ex rel. Miller v. Holzmann, 2007 WL 781941 (D.D.C. Mar. 12, 2007)
8
Fortis Corporate Ins., SA v. Viken Ship Mgmt. AS, 2007 WL 3287357 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 5, 2007)
9
Stroupe v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., 2007 WL 3223224 (E.D. Va. Oct. 29, 2007)
10
Imig, Inc. v. Electrolux Home Care Prods., Ltd., 2007 WL 900310 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2007)

Legacy, Inc. v. Tekserve POS, LLC, 2007 WL 772958 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 12, 2007)

Key Insight: Where defendant discarded his hard drive the day after the lawsuit was filed, court granted plaintiff’s motion for spoliation sanctions but ordered plaintiff to pare down the requested fees and expenses to those having a proximate causal nexus to the spoliation; court further ordered counsel to meet and confer on the issue

Nature of Case: Company sued former employee who downloaded proprietary files just prior to resigning and going to work for competitor

Electronic Data Involved: Confidential files

In re Tri-State Armored Servs., Inc., 366 B.R. 326 (D.N.J. 2007)

Key Insight: District Court affirmed Bankruptcy Court’s ruling dismissing trustee’s claim for spoliation of evidence since the trustee failed to establish the fifth element of the claim

Nature of Case: Insurer brought adversary proceeding against Chapter 7 trustee

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Escobar v. City of Houston, 2007 WL 2900581 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 29, 2007)

Key Insight: Adverse-inference instruction not warranted where there was no showing that relevant electronic communications were destroyed or that destruction occurred in bad faith; officers involved in the shooting were not likely to have used email to communicate about the event in the day after it occurred, and, under HPD’s document retention and destruction policy, electronic communications records were routinely destroyed within ninety days

Nature of Case: Wrongful death action based on shooting death of 14-year-old boy by police officer

Electronic Data Involved: Records of Houston Police Department electronic communications in the 24 hours after victim’s death

Qantum Communications Corp. v. Star Broad., Inc., 473 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (S.D. Fla. 2007)

Key Insight: Court imposed sanctions of default judgment and award of reasonable attorney fees and costs based upon defendants’ pattern of discovery misconduct, which included defendant’s lying under oath regarding key issue in case and failing to produce key “smoking gun” documents; court set hearing to determine the appropriate amount of damages and fees and costs

Nature of Case: Action for specific performance of asset purchase agreement

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Bakhtiari v. Lutz, 2007 WL 3377215 (8th Cir. Nov. 15, 2007)

Key Insight: District court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to impose spoliation sanctions against defendant university for deletion of former teaching assistant’s email account, where university backed-up the contents of the account onto two CDs before deleting it, and the deletion occurred before the lawsuit was filed

Nature of Case: Employment discrimination, civil rights

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Network Sys. Architects Corp. v. Dimitruk, 2007 WL 4442349 (Mass. Super. Ct. Dec. 6, 2007)

Key Insight: Where former employee admitted using file shredder program on his NSA-issued laptop before returning it, and evidence showed use of file shredder program on competitor-issued laptop computer, court found defendants? conduct was ?egregious? and amounted to spoliation but denied plaintiff?s request for entry of default judgment; court instead ordered production of computer hard drive for further examination, dismissed defendants? counterclaims, and ordered defendants to pay attorneys? fees and expenses incurred as a result of defendants? misconduct

Nature of Case: Seller of computer hardware and software sued former employee and competitor for misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Laptop computers

Fortis Corporate Ins., SA v. Viken Ship Mgmt. AS, 2007 WL 3287357 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 5, 2007)

Key Insight: Court denied plaintiff’s motion for spoliation sanctions, finding no basis in the record for concluding that defendant’s failure to preserve email and other materials was so blameworthy that defendant should be deprived, either in whole or part, of the opportunity to defend the case on the merits, and adding: “Perhaps in the fullness of time foreign-based companies doing business in the United States will be held to the same ‘litigation holds’ and other devices now routinely applied by litigants here to make sure pertinent documents and other materials are retained and produced. And perhaps they should be held to the same standards in an era of ever-expanding global trade. Increasingly negligence on the other side of the globe can cause injury locally.”

Nature of Case: Subrogation action against foreign-based shipowner

Electronic Data Involved: Email

Stroupe v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P., 2007 WL 3223224 (E.D. Va. Oct. 29, 2007)

Key Insight: Adverse inference instruction not warranted for defendant’s routine destruction of surveillance videotapes created on date of incident; defendant presented evidence that there was no videotape that depicted the subject area where the incident occurred and plaintiff did not show that destroyed videotapes contained any images or information relevant to any issue at trial

Nature of Case: Personal injury

Electronic Data Involved: Surveillance videotapes

Imig, Inc. v. Electrolux Home Care Prods., Ltd., 2007 WL 900310 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2007)

Key Insight: Court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on copyright infringement counterclaims, based in part on adverse inference stemming from plaintiff’s failure to preserve and produce relevant evidence; defendant showed that substantial portion of deleted files recovered by its forensic expert were favorable to its position on various claims

Nature of Case: Plaintiff alleged defendant improperly disparaged plaintiff’s product, and defendant asserted counterlaims for copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data on hard drives

Copyright © 2025, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.