Third Party Discovery – Page 24 – Electronic Discovery Law

UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Does 1-4, 2006 WL 1343597 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 6, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Finding good cause and no First Amendment prohibition, court granted plaintiffs? motion for leave to take immediate discovery and serve Rule 45 subpoena upon ISP to obtain names and contact information for Doe Defendants; ISP to serve copy of subpoena and court?s order upon relevant subscribers and subscribers would have 15 days to file any objections; if no objections filed, ISP would have 10 days to produce each subscriber’s name, address, telephone number, email address, and Media Access Control (?MAC?) addresses

Nature of Case: Copyright infringement

Electronic Data Involved: Names and contact information for ISP subscribers

O’Grady v. Superior Court, 44 Cal.Rptr.3d 72 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Internet publishers successfully petitioned California appellate court for writ of certiorari directing that subpoenas issued by Apple Computer, Inc. be quashed; trial court erred in denying motion for protective order because, among other reasons, subpoena to email service provider could not be enforced consistent with the plain terms of the federal Stored Communications Act

Nature of Case: Underlying suit involved misappropriation of trade secrets and related claims

Electronic Data Involved: Email containing information regarding sources of trade secret information posted on internet

Frees, Inc. v. McMillian, 2006 WL 2668843 (E.D. Tenn. Sept. 15, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Court narrowed subpoena to defendant’s new employer, setting out “tiered discovery” process: plaintiff was to identify at least one project involving files allegedly removed from disputed laptop; new employer would then search for documents and/or files of the type described that were related to that project and produce them; if any of the produced documents and/or files were shown to be relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, then the parties would proceed to the ?second tier? of discovery and plaintiff could then request documents related to other projects; if no responsive documents could be found with respect to the first identified projects, however, plaintiff would be required to make a sufficient showing to the court as to why discovery should proceed further

Nature of Case: Design firm sued former vice president under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

Electronic Data Involved: Proprietary business and technological data

Friedman v. Superior Court, 2006 WL 2497981 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 29, 2006) (Not Officially Published)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Finding requests for production too broad and not reasonably particularized, appellate court concluded that trial court had erred in, among other things, not adequately resolving the question of how burdensome compliance with production requests would have proven to nonparties, where nonparties? counsel opined that it would take 5,260 hours to review email, at cost of $1,393,900, and requesting party?s expert estimated only 10 hours for such review; appellate court granted writ and vacated trial court’s orders

Nature of Case: Nonparties sought writ of mandate overturning trial court’s orders granting motion to compel depositions and production of documents pursuant to subpoenas

Electronic Data Involved: Email

S.E.C. v. Brady, 2006 WL 3301865 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 16, 2006)

Dec 01 2006

Key Insight: Court sustained objection to portion of defendant’s subpoena based on undue burden, where potentially responsive electronic data was estimated to be 32,222,000 pages and there were over 226 boxes of hard copy documents, and vast majority of responsive documents were in the possession of the SEC and had either already been produced by the SEC to Brady, or would shortly be produced

Nature of Case: Securities litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Email and electronic data

Galvin v. Gillette Co., 2005 WL 1155253 (Mass. Super. Apr. 28, 2005)

Dec 01 2005

Key Insight: Where much of the material sought did not appear to touch on or be relevant to the matter under investigation by the Secretary, i.e., whether fraud may be present in the UBS or Goldman, Sachs fairness opinions based on information provided by Gillette, court quashed broad subpoena issued to Gillette without prejudice to the Secretary issuing a new subpoena more narrowly drafted

Nature of Case: Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts issued subpoena under state securities act in connection with pending merger

Electronic Data Involved: Email

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

BASF Fina Petrochemicals Ltd. P’ship v. H.B. Zachry Co., 2004 WL 2612835 (Tex. App. Nov. 18, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court awarded non-party its costs of production, but ruled that non-party was not entitled, under either Tex. R. Civ. P. 205.3 or 176.7, to recover attorneys’ fees incurred in responding to subpoena, noting that non-party obtained legal advice to protect its own interests, not to facilitate compliance with subpoena

Nature of Case: Construction litigation

Electronic Data Involved: Electronic data

Braxton v. Farmer’s Ins. Group, 209 F.R.D. 651 (N.D. Ala. 2002)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Non-party subpoena issued by plaintiff to insurance agents for email and electronic documents touching on, relating to or concerning use of consumer credit reports in setting homeowners’ insurance premiums quashed as unduly burdensome, in absence of showing that defendant’s production of such materials was inadequate

Nature of Case: Class action alleging that insurer violated Fair Credit Reporting Act

Electronic Data Involved: Email and documents in electronic format

Polito v. AOL Time Warner, Inc., 2004 WL 3768897 (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Jan. 28, 2004)

Dec 01 2004

Key Insight: Court ordered AOL to reveal the identities of its anonymous subscribers who had transmitted offensive emails and instant messages where plaintiff had established that: (1) she had a prima facie basis for asserting criminal or civil liability against the anonymous authors; (2) the identifying information was relevant to her claims and necessary to obtain redress; (3) she was seeking the information in good faith and not for an improper purpose; and (4) she was unable to obtain the identifying information by alternative means

Nature of Case: Individual sued ISP seeking disclosure of identities of subscribers who sent her offensive email and instant messages

Electronic Data Involved: Identities of subscribers

Tag:Third Party Discovery