View by Topic
Duties Respecting Electronic Evidence > Production, Generally
Hoxie v. Livingston County, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79544 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 5, 2010).
Plaintiff was permitted to obtain a mirror image of the hard drive of a county jail computer because the numbering system on the jail's master list of electronically stored jail policies differed from the numbering on actual policies produced by the jail.
Plaintiff was permitted to obtain a mirror image of the hard drive of a county jail computer because the numbering system on the jail's master list of electronically stored jail policies differed from the numbering on actual policies produced by the jail.
Multiven, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71221 (N.D. Cal. July 9, 2010).
After plaintiff reported that it would take two or three more months to finish its document review, the court expanded duties of a special master to include design of a search protocol and selection of a vendor to assist plaintiff in reviewing documents. The court approved an agreement of the parties to share equally in the cost of the vendor.
After plaintiff reported that it would take two or three more months to finish its document review, the court expanded duties of a special master to include design of a search protocol and selection of a vendor to assist plaintiff in reviewing documents. The court approved an agreement of the parties to share equally in the cost of the vendor.
In re Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. Securities Litigation, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71295 (D.N.M. July 1, 2010).
The motion of plaintiffs in a federal securities class action for a partial lifting of the PSLRA stay of discovery pending resolution of a motion to dismiss the action was denied. The trustee in bankruptcy for the principal defendant assured the court there would be no spoliation of evidence that included mirror images of computer drives, and the need of plaintiffs for more information to evaluate a possible settlement for available insurance proceeds was insufficient to cause them undue prejudice from the stay.
The motion of plaintiffs in a federal securities class action for a partial lifting of the PSLRA stay of discovery pending resolution of a motion to dismiss the action was denied. The trustee in bankruptcy for the principal defendant assured the court there would be no spoliation of evidence that included mirror images of computer drives, and the need of plaintiffs for more information to evaluate a possible settlement for available insurance proceeds was insufficient to cause them undue prejudice from the stay.
Aponte-Navedo v. Nalco Chemical Co., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50957 (D.P.R. May 20, 2010).
A request in an employment discrimination action for information regarding databases and computer information was overbroad because it was not restricted to defendant's Puerto Rico office where plaintiff worked.
A request in an employment discrimination action for information regarding databases and computer information was overbroad because it was not restricted to defendant's Puerto Rico office where plaintiff worked.
Fidelity Information Services, Inc. v. Debtdomain GLMS PTE Ltd., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50055 (S.D.N.Y. May 14, 2010).
A plaintiff that failed to respond to defendant's motion to compel production of documents was denied reconsideration of an order directing plaintiff to produce "any electronic documents created prior to October 1, 2008" that were responsive to defendant's request. Since plaintiff had failed to respond to defendants' motion to compel, there was nothing the court overlooked that could be reconsidered.
A plaintiff that failed to respond to defendant's motion to compel production of documents was denied reconsideration of an order directing plaintiff to produce "any electronic documents created prior to October 1, 2008" that were responsive to defendant's request. Since plaintiff had failed to respond to defendants' motion to compel, there was nothing the court overlooked that could be reconsidered.
Kinetic Concepts, Inc. v. Convatec Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46976 (M.D.N.C. May 12, 2010).
An "informed suspicion that additional non-privileged documents exist" could not "alone support an order compelling production of documents."
An "informed suspicion that additional non-privileged documents exist" could not "alone support an order compelling production of documents."
U.S. Bank National Association v. Parker, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11579 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 10, 2010).
Plaintiff's request for expedited discovery of defendant's personal cell phone, PDA, and computer was denied because defendant represented to the court that evidence sought by plaintiff would not be altered or destroyed.
Plaintiff's request for expedited discovery of defendant's personal cell phone, PDA, and computer was denied because defendant represented to the court that evidence sought by plaintiff would not be altered or destroyed.
Dowling v. Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 2299 (6th Cir. Feb. 3, 2010).
A district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs' request for more time for discovery and granting summary judgment to defendants. While plaintiffs' counsel "should be applauded for beginning discovery requests informally, he was dilatory in failing to make formal discovery requests when informal requests proved unavailing."
A district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs' request for more time for discovery and granting summary judgment to defendants. While plaintiffs' counsel "should be applauded for beginning discovery requests informally, he was dilatory in failing to make formal discovery requests when informal requests proved unavailing."
Rodriguez-Torres v. Government Development Bank of Puerto Rico, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3958 (D.P.R. 2010).
Articles suggesting that email was more conducive to derogatory remarks did not provide good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) for requiring defendant in an employment discrimination case to produce electronic documents that the court considered not reasonably accessible due to a $35,000 search cost.
Articles suggesting that email was more conducive to derogatory remarks did not provide good cause under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) for requiring defendant in an employment discrimination case to produce electronic documents that the court considered not reasonably accessible due to a $35,000 search cost.
Cornwell v. Northern Ohio Surgical Center, Ltd., 2009 Ohio App. LEXIS 5814 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 31, 2009).
A trial court order allowing plaintiff's creation of mirror images of defendant's computer hard drives that contained protected medical information of non-party patients was affirmed. Plaintiff's computer forensics expert would not be reviewing file contents when creating mirror images. He would be using search terms only to identify files on the mirror images that defendant would review prior to production.
A trial court order allowing plaintiff's creation of mirror images of defendant's computer hard drives that contained protected medical information of non-party patients was affirmed. Plaintiff's computer forensics expert would not be reviewing file contents when creating mirror images. He would be using search terms only to identify files on the mirror images that defendant would review prior to production.
Smith v. Life Investors Insurance Company of America, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96310 (W.D. Pa. Oct. 16, 2009).
Defendant was ordered to instruct its e-discovery vendor to determine how many documents would be retrieved using each of five phrases suggested by plaintiff to limit the number of documents that would be retrieved using only a single term common to each of the phrases.
Defendant was ordered to instruct its e-discovery vendor to determine how many documents would be retrieved using each of five phrases suggested by plaintiff to limit the number of documents that would be retrieved using only a single term common to each of the phrases.
High Voltage Beverages, LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88259 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 7, 2009).
Under the proportionality standard of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C), the court held that defendant did not have to review its collection of 17 gigabytes or 1.5 million pages of documents assembled through litigation holds in other actions. Defendant was willing to allow plaintiff to search through the collection, and counsel for defendant unequivocally stated that all relevant documents already had been provided to plaintiff in earlier productions.
Under the proportionality standard of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(C), the court held that defendant did not have to review its collection of 17 gigabytes or 1.5 million pages of documents assembled through litigation holds in other actions. Defendant was willing to allow plaintiff to search through the collection, and counsel for defendant unequivocally stated that all relevant documents already had been provided to plaintiff in earlier productions.
Lawson v. Plantation General Hospital, L.P., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81753 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 25, 2009).
Defendant was not obligated to supplement its Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) initial disclosure with documents that the parties first learned about during a deposition. Rule 26 permitted descriptions of categories of documents in lieu of production of the documents, the documents were described at the deposition, and defendant stated that it did not intend to use the documents at trial in support of the defense.
Defendant was not obligated to supplement its Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) initial disclosure with documents that the parties first learned about during a deposition. Rule 26 permitted descriptions of categories of documents in lieu of production of the documents, the documents were described at the deposition, and defendant stated that it did not intend to use the documents at trial in support of the defense.
In re DirecTech Southwest, Inc., Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69142 (E.D. La. Aug. 7, 2009).
Although defendants contended that using terms suggested by plaintiffs for a search of defendants' electronically stored information would cost $100,000, the court ordered defendants to use the terms and complete the search within ten working days. Plaintiffs' terms were more appropriate than the limited terms suggested by defendants for the discovery required for plaintiffs to respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment.
Although defendants contended that using terms suggested by plaintiffs for a search of defendants' electronically stored information would cost $100,000, the court ordered defendants to use the terms and complete the search within ten working days. Plaintiffs' terms were more appropriate than the limited terms suggested by defendants for the discovery required for plaintiffs to respond to defendants' motion for summary judgment.
Barton Group, Inc. v. NCR Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62852 (S.D.N.Y. July 22, 2009).
Defendant was not obligated to categorize its electronic records according to plaintiff's document requests because the parties had agreed, subject to a strict confidentiality agreement, that defendant could produce its electronic documents without prior review.
Defendant was not obligated to categorize its electronic records according to plaintiff's document requests because the parties had agreed, subject to a strict confidentiality agreement, that defendant could produce its electronic documents without prior review.
In re Zurn Pex Plumbing Products Liability Litigation, “Zurn Pex II”, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47636 (D. Minn. June 5, 2009).
Additional discovery by plaintiffs of defendants' electronically stored information to support class certification was limited by the court to 14 search terms in order to avoid hits on irrelevant documents and to lessen the costs and time for the search. Defendants estimated that the search requested by plaintiffs would require 17 weeks and over $1 million in review costs in addition to outside vendor costs.
Additional discovery by plaintiffs of defendants' electronically stored information to support class certification was limited by the court to 14 search terms in order to avoid hits on irrelevant documents and to lessen the costs and time for the search. Defendants estimated that the search requested by plaintiffs would require 17 weeks and over $1 million in review costs in addition to outside vendor costs.
Feig v. Apple Organization, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49081 (S.D. Fla. May 29, 2009).
A defendant that went out of business and sold its server to a third party was ordered to search through email accounts of 27 employees on the server and to produce responsive email. In response to defendant's undue burden argument, the court directed that defendant could seek a protective order only if a computer forensics expert agreed that the search could be performed only through a document-by-document review of the email on the server.
A defendant that went out of business and sold its server to a third party was ordered to search through email accounts of 27 employees on the server and to produce responsive email. In response to defendant's undue burden argument, the court directed that defendant could seek a protective order only if a computer forensics expert agreed that the search could be performed only through a document-by-document review of the email on the server.
Weiss v. National Westminster Bank, PLC, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35103 (E.D.N.Y. May 14, 2007).
Despite British bank customer secrecy laws, a bank in London was ordered to produce documents requested by U.S. citizens who were victims of terrorist attacks in Israel. The records concerned a bank customer that the victims claimed had assisted in financing the organization that carried out the attacks, and the mutual interest of British and U.S. governments in combating financing of terrorism outweighed the British interest in preserving bank customer secrecy.
Despite British bank customer secrecy laws, a bank in London was ordered to produce documents requested by U.S. citizens who were victims of terrorist attacks in Israel. The records concerned a bank customer that the victims claimed had assisted in financing the organization that carried out the attacks, and the mutual interest of British and U.S. governments in combating financing of terrorism outweighed the British interest in preserving bank customer secrecy.
Artie's Auto Body, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 2009 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1286 (Conn. Super. Ct. May 7, 2009).
An insurer's ultimate production of 2.5 million documents over five years was not a good faith response to requests for production because 1.4 million of the 2.5 million documents had been provided after fact discovery and fact depositions had closed. The insurer was ordered to pay the costs of necessary re-depositions and of conversion of the 1.4 million documents to a searchable OCR format.
An insurer's ultimate production of 2.5 million documents over five years was not a good faith response to requests for production because 1.4 million of the 2.5 million documents had been provided after fact discovery and fact depositions had closed. The insurer was ordered to pay the costs of necessary re-depositions and of conversion of the 1.4 million documents to a searchable OCR format.
Etzion v. Etzion, “Etzion III”, 2009 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3643 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't May 5, 2009).
A trial court’s denial of a former spouse’s motion for discovery of data on her former husband’s personal and business computers was reversed. The spouse adequately alleged fraud by her former husband in claiming not to have a deal pending at the time of their divorce settlement that resulted in the post-divorce sale of one of his properties at 13 times its appraised value.
A trial court’s denial of a former spouse’s motion for discovery of data on her former husband’s personal and business computers was reversed. The spouse adequately alleged fraud by her former husband in claiming not to have a deal pending at the time of their divorce settlement that resulted in the post-divorce sale of one of his properties at 13 times its appraised value.
State ex rel. Morgan v. Strickland, 2009 Ohio LEXIS 1029 (Ohio Apr. 24, 2009).
The Ohio Supreme Court held that although Ohio’s governor failed to provide a required estimate of the “reasonable time” within which the governor would respond to a request for public records, a writ of mandamus would be limited to compelling the governor to continue reviewing records and to provide responsive records within a reasonable time.
The Ohio Supreme Court held that although Ohio’s governor failed to provide a required estimate of the “reasonable time” within which the governor would respond to a request for public records, a writ of mandamus would be limited to compelling the governor to continue reviewing records and to provide responsive records within a reasonable time.
Patterson v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34585 (D. Kan. Apr. 23, 2009).
The court denied plaintiff’s motion for an order requiring defendant to produce backup tapes for almost ten years and to provide information about defendant’s policies regarding computer systems, email storage, and employee use of company and personal computers. The parties had failed to follow the district court’s local guidelines for electronically stored information, and plaintiff had served its requests for production just three and a half months before the close of discovery.
The court denied plaintiff’s motion for an order requiring defendant to produce backup tapes for almost ten years and to provide information about defendant’s policies regarding computer systems, email storage, and employee use of company and personal computers. The parties had failed to follow the district court’s local guidelines for electronically stored information, and plaintiff had served its requests for production just three and a half months before the close of discovery.
Southeastern Mechanical Services, Inc. v. Brody, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36183 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 14, 2009).
Defendant’s motion to compel production of electronic records was denied because the motion was filed three months after the deadline for discovery and plaintiff had affirmatively stated that it had produced all responsive documents.
Defendant’s motion to compel production of electronic records was denied because the motion was filed three months after the deadline for discovery and plaintiff had affirmatively stated that it had produced all responsive documents.
City of Dallas v. Dallas Morning News, LP, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 2514 (Tex. App. Dallas Apr. 9, 2009).
Email to or from a mayor’s Blackberry which did not go through a city’s server was not “public information” under the Texas Public Information Act unless it was shown that the city had a right of access to the email and that the email was collected, assembled, or maintained in connection with official business of the city.
Email to or from a mayor’s Blackberry which did not go through a city’s server was not “public information” under the Texas Public Information Act unless it was shown that the city had a right of access to the email and that the email was collected, assembled, or maintained in connection with official business of the city.
Averett v. Honda of America Mfg., Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30179 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 24, 2009).
Requiring defendant to search all records referring to plaintiff during her 17 years as defendant’s employee was considered “overly burdensome.” According to the court, recent revisions to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b) “communicate the message that discovery is not unlimited.”
Requiring defendant to search all records referring to plaintiff during her 17 years as defendant’s employee was considered “overly burdensome.” According to the court, recent revisions to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b) “communicate the message that discovery is not unlimited.”
William A. Gross Construction Associates, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22903 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2009).
The court issued a “wake-up call” to lawyers in the Southern District of New York “about the need for careful thought, quality control, testing, and cooperation with opposing counsel in designing search terms or ‘keywords’ to be used to produce emails or other electronically stored information.”
The court issued a “wake-up call” to lawyers in the Southern District of New York “about the need for careful thought, quality control, testing, and cooperation with opposing counsel in designing search terms or ‘keywords’ to be used to produce emails or other electronically stored information.”
White v. Graceland College Center for Professional Development & Lifelong Learning, Inc., “White II”, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22068 (D. Kan. Mar. 18, 2009).
Discrepancies in the times that three email documents and their attachments were created led the court to order defendants to produce the same email from in-boxes in addition to sent boxes and to produce the PST and OST files for the email. The parties also were ordered to agree on a protocol for inspection of defendants’ hard drives, but plaintiff’s request to inspect system clocks without knowing that motherboards had not been changed was denied for being a futile exercise.
Discrepancies in the times that three email documents and their attachments were created led the court to order defendants to produce the same email from in-boxes in addition to sent boxes and to produce the PST and OST files for the email. The parties also were ordered to agree on a protocol for inspection of defendants’ hard drives, but plaintiff’s request to inspect system clocks without knowing that motherboards had not been changed was denied for being a futile exercise.
Waldman v. Wachovia Corp., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1988 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 12, 2009).
The automatic stay of discovery in a securities class action under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 while a motion to dismiss was pending was partially lifted by the court. Defendants were required to produce documents they already had produced to government regulators so that plaintiffs could evaluate whether to continue their action following defendants’ settlement with regulators that included “some compensation” to the plaintiff class.
The automatic stay of discovery in a securities class action under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 while a motion to dismiss was pending was partially lifted by the court. Defendants were required to produce documents they already had produced to government regulators so that plaintiffs could evaluate whether to continue their action following defendants’ settlement with regulators that included “some compensation” to the plaintiff class.
Gipson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103822 (D. Kan. Dec. 23, 2008).
Parties that had filed over 115 motions in less than a year of litigation were ordered to read the Sedona Conference Cooperation Proclamation. They also were ordered to prepare for appointment of a discovery master if they could not agree on better handling of discovery and other pretrial disputes.
Parties that had filed over 115 motions in less than a year of litigation were ordered to read the Sedona Conference Cooperation Proclamation. They also were ordered to prepare for appointment of a discovery master if they could not agree on better handling of discovery and other pretrial disputes.
AIU Ins. Co. v. TIG Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96693 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2008).
The fact that documents referring to employees of plaintiff were drafted before the use of email became widespread did not excuse plaintiff from its obligation to search email of the employees for documents responsive to defendant’s discovery request.
The fact that documents referring to employees of plaintiff were drafted before the use of email became widespread did not excuse plaintiff from its obligation to search email of the employees for documents responsive to defendant’s discovery request.
Spieker v. Quest Cherokee, LLC, "Spieker I ", 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88103 (D. Kan. Oct. 30, 2008).
Plaintiffs’ motion prior to class certification to compel production of electronically stored information that defendant estimated would cost about $375,000 was denied by the court because plaintiffs had not explained how the information was relevant to the issue of class certification.
Plaintiffs’ motion prior to class certification to compel production of electronically stored information that defendant estimated would cost about $375,000 was denied by the court because plaintiffs had not explained how the information was relevant to the issue of class certification.
Dong Ah Tire & Rubber Co. v. Glasforms, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90708 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2008).
The duty under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1) to supplement production of documents did not cover email generated after the relevant time frame of the production of documents.
The duty under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1) to supplement production of documents did not cover email generated after the relevant time frame of the production of documents.
ReedHycalog UK, Ltd. v. United Diamond Drilling Services, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93177 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2008).
Defendants who responded to a document request with a “data dump” of electronic documents that were not reviewed for relevance were ordered to use only documents resulting from use of search terms on the data dump.
Defendants who responded to a document request with a “data dump” of electronic documents that were not reviewed for relevance were ordered to use only documents resulting from use of search terms on the data dump.
Pass & Seymour, Inc. v. Hubbell, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85380 (N.D.N.Y Sept. 12, 2008).
While Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b) permitted production of documents as the documents were ordinarily retained, production of 405,367 text-searchable pages of documents in 202 unlabeled folders failed to include information needed to make the production useful to the requesting party and failed to meet the requirements of Rule 34. The court ordered the producing party to provide an index of the documents listing the custodian, location, and general description of the filing system applicable to each document.
While Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b) permitted production of documents as the documents were ordinarily retained, production of 405,367 text-searchable pages of documents in 202 unlabeled folders failed to include information needed to make the production useful to the requesting party and failed to meet the requirements of Rule 34. The court ordered the producing party to provide an index of the documents listing the custodian, location, and general description of the filing system applicable to each document.
Louis Vuitton Malletier, S.A. v. Akanoc Solutions, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63115 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2008).
Defendant web site hosts would not violate the Stored Communications Act by providing otherwise publicly available information on their servers in response to a discovery request, and a search of their 1500 servers for content related to 67 specific web sites was not shown to be unduly burdensome.
Defendant web site hosts would not violate the Stored Communications Act by providing otherwise publicly available information on their servers in response to a discovery request, and a search of their 1500 servers for content related to 67 specific web sites was not shown to be unduly burdensome.
Hightower v. Heritage Academy of Tulsa, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57078 (N.D. Okla. July 29, 2008).
Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of email of four of defendant’s board members relating to plaintiff or her employment by defendant for four years was granted. Defendant failed to show the email was not reasonably accessible, and defendant’s objection to production was undermined by defendant’s failure to produce, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(C), other responsive documents to which the objection did not apply.
Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of email of four of defendant’s board members relating to plaintiff or her employment by defendant for four years was granted. Defendant failed to show the email was not reasonably accessible, and defendant’s objection to production was undermined by defendant’s failure to produce, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(C), other responsive documents to which the objection did not apply.
Huang v. Gateway Hotel Holdings, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49780 (E.D. Mo. June 18, 2008).
Although plaintiffs had to disclose what data storage devices they had, they did not have to produce the devices in response to defendant’s request for production of all such devices for inspection by a forensic consulting expert. Defendant first had to demonstrate a need for the inspection before production of the devices would be required.
Although plaintiffs had to disclose what data storage devices they had, they did not have to produce the devices in response to defendant’s request for production of all such devices for inspection by a forensic consulting expert. Defendant first had to demonstrate a need for the inspection before production of the devices would be required.
United States v. Two Bank Accounts, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57338 (D.S.D. July 2, 2008).
A contestant appearing pro se to claim funds in a government forfeiture proceeding was provided with a copy of federal rules of civil procedure related to discovery and ordered to produce his computers for government inspection rather than hard drive mirror images made by a third party.
A contestant appearing pro se to claim funds in a government forfeiture proceeding was provided with a copy of federal rules of civil procedure related to discovery and ordered to produce his computers for government inspection rather than hard drive mirror images made by a third party.
Canon U.S.A., Inc. v. S.A.M., Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47712 (E.D. La. June 20, 2008).
Plaintiff was granted its attorney fees and costs in seeking information from third parties that defendant company could have provided directly, and the company was ordered to hire a computer forensics expert to examine its server for responsive documents to produce to plaintiff.
Plaintiff was granted its attorney fees and costs in seeking information from third parties that defendant company could have provided directly, and the company was ordered to hire a computer forensics expert to examine its server for responsive documents to produce to plaintiff.
Race Tires America, Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46605 (W.D. Pa. June 16, 2008).
In response to plaintiff’s objection to a rolling production, defendant was ordered to produce all overdue non-privileged and responsive documents and electronically stored information within just over a month.
In response to plaintiff’s objection to a rolling production, defendant was ordered to produce all overdue non-privileged and responsive documents and electronically stored information within just over a month.
Regan-Touhy v. Walgreen Co., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 10704 (10th Cir. May 20, 2008).
A federal court of appeals encouraged district courts to analyze the costs and benefits of sweeping discovery requests in order to avoid displacement of trial on the merits by collateral discovery disputes.
A federal court of appeals encouraged district courts to analyze the costs and benefits of sweeping discovery requests in order to avoid displacement of trial on the merits by collateral discovery disputes.
Petersen v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35721 (C.D. Ill. May 1, 2008).
Failure of plaintiffs to request discovery relating to the meaning of a data readout until after the close of discovery led the court to deny the discovery request and to consider imposing costs on plaintiffs.
Failure of plaintiffs to request discovery relating to the meaning of a data readout until after the close of discovery led the court to deny the discovery request and to consider imposing costs on plaintiffs.
Thomas v. IEM, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19186 (M.D. La. Mar. 12, 2008).
Plaintiff was not allowed to use a Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 subpoena to obtain email of nine employees of defendant after the deadline for the same discovery pursuant to Rule 34, which provided for document production by parties, had expired.
Plaintiff was not allowed to use a Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 subpoena to obtain email of nine employees of defendant after the deadline for the same discovery pursuant to Rule 34, which provided for document production by parties, had expired.
Cone v. Rainbow Play Systems, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17489 (D.S.D. Mar. 5, 2008).
Despite defendant's objection that plaintiff, proceeding pro se, had not complied with discovery rules in seeking his managers' email after discovery was closed, the court ordered an in camera examination of all documents concerning plaintiff and his claim.
Despite defendant's objection that plaintiff, proceeding pro se, had not complied with discovery rules in seeking his managers' email after discovery was closed, the court ordered an in camera examination of all documents concerning plaintiff and his claim.
Peacock v. Merrill, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3751 (S.D. Ala. Jan. 17, 2008).
Defendants' request for an exact copy of a computer disk that plaintiff contended had hundreds of irrelevant and confidential documents was denied. However, defendants were permitted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b) to inspect an exact copy of the disk at the office of plaintiff's counsel for tagging and copying of documents deemed relevant by defendants' counsel.
Defendants' request for an exact copy of a computer disk that plaintiff contended had hundreds of irrelevant and confidential documents was denied. However, defendants were permitted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b) to inspect an exact copy of the disk at the office of plaintiff's counsel for tagging and copying of documents deemed relevant by defendants' counsel.
In re Honza, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 20 (Tex. Ct. App. Jan. 2, 2008).
In a matter of first impression, a Texas appellate court adopted what it termed an emerging and fairly uniform approach of state and federal decisions concerning access to an opponent's hard drives. The court allowed imaging of hard drives to proceed for the limited purpose of searching for particular documents with metadata in order to determine when modifications to the documents were made.
In a matter of first impression, a Texas appellate court adopted what it termed an emerging and fairly uniform approach of state and federal decisions concerning access to an opponent's hard drives. The court allowed imaging of hard drives to proceed for the limited purpose of searching for particular documents with metadata in order to determine when modifications to the documents were made.
Vaughn v. City of Puyallup, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84380 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 6, 2007).
Although defendant was under a duty to produce all relevant documents, there was no authority to require defendant "to conduct and document a reasonably comprehensive search of its electronic data such that 'it is comprehensible to Plaintiff.'"
Although defendant was under a duty to produce all relevant documents, there was no authority to require defendant "to conduct and document a reasonably comprehensive search of its electronic data such that 'it is comprehensible to Plaintiff.'"
Christian v. Central Record Service, "Christian II", 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80027 (W.D. Ark. Oct. 19, 2007).
Although defendant deleted responsive email from its computer system, the court declined to order defendant to produce existing hard copies of the deleted email. The copies had been filed in an unknown number of boxes within several hundred thousand boxes stored by defendant and searching for the hard copies would be unduly burdensome.
Although defendant deleted responsive email from its computer system, the court declined to order defendant to produce existing hard copies of the deleted email. The copies had been filed in an unknown number of boxes within several hundred thousand boxes stored by defendant and searching for the hard copies would be unduly burdensome.
Christian v. Central Record Service, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67546 (W.D. Ark. Sept. 11, 2007).
Based on defense counsel's statement to plaintiff that her email while employed by defendant no longer existed and that retrieval of deleted email did not appear possible, the court concluded that defendant had complied with plaintiff's request to defendant for production of the email.
Based on defense counsel's statement to plaintiff that her email while employed by defendant no longer existed and that retrieval of deleted email did not appear possible, the court concluded that defendant had complied with plaintiff's request to defendant for production of the email.
Butler v. Kmart Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61141 (N.D. Miss. Aug. 20, 2007).
Defendant's failure to describe efforts to search for electronically stored information led the court to order a thorough search by defendant of its computer systems. However, the court denied open access to defendant's systems by plaintiff's expert because Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) did not give a requesting party the right to search the responding party's records.
Defendant's failure to describe efforts to search for electronically stored information led the court to order a thorough search by defendant of its computer systems. However, the court denied open access to defendant's systems by plaintiff's expert because Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) did not give a requesting party the right to search the responding party's records.
Hardin v. Belmont Textile Machinery Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57937 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 7, 2007).
Defendant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 subpoena for home computers of plaintiff was enforced subject to a protective order for plaintiff's personal, non-business information on the computers.
Defendant's Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 subpoena for home computers of plaintiff was enforced subject to a protective order for plaintiff's personal, non-business information on the computers.
Flying J Inc. v. TA Operating Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55574 (D. Utah Jul. 30, 2007).
Plaintiffs who were willing to produce documents and deposition transcripts from databases prepared in other litigation were not required to produce the actual databases.
Plaintiffs who were willing to produce documents and deposition transcripts from databases prepared in other litigation were not required to produce the actual databases.
Michigan First Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Society Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49166 (E.D. Mich. Jul. 9, 2007).
Following the recent amendment of Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) designed to include electronically stored information, defendant was required to produce documents not produced in response to three earlier document requests that fell within a revised definition of "document" provided by plaintiff.
Following the recent amendment of Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a) designed to include electronically stored information, defendant was required to produce documents not produced in response to three earlier document requests that fell within a revised definition of "document" provided by plaintiff.
Wimsatt v. Superior Court, 2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 996 (Cal. Ct. App. June 18, 2007).
A trial court was directed to issue a protective order maintaining confidentiality of mediation briefs and email concerning the mediation. There was no exception to a statute requiring confidentiality of mediation documents even if the documents allegedly contained evidence of perjury or inconsistent statements.
A trial court was directed to issue a protective order maintaining confidentiality of mediation briefs and email concerning the mediation. There was no exception to a statute requiring confidentiality of mediation documents even if the documents allegedly contained evidence of perjury or inconsistent statements.
ATM Exchange, Inc. v. Visa International Service Association, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44492 (S.D. Ohio June 7, 2007).
A credit card issuer was ordered to verify that it had produced all relevant and responsive information collected from the imaged hard drive on an employee's computer.
A credit card issuer was ordered to verify that it had produced all relevant and responsive information collected from the imaged hard drive on an employee's computer.
Disability Rights Council of Greater Washington v. Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39605 (D.D.C. June 1, 2007).
After weighing Advisory Committee factors under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B ), the court ordered restoration and searches of defendant's backup tapes because defendant had failed to put a litigation hold on a program that automatically purged email every sixty days during the three years after the complaint in the action was filed. The court directed the parties to prepare a stipulated protocol for a search of backup tapes with attention to "concept searching" rather than less efficient "keyword searching."
After weighing Advisory Committee factors under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B ), the court ordered restoration and searches of defendant's backup tapes because defendant had failed to put a litigation hold on a program that automatically purged email every sixty days during the three years after the complaint in the action was filed. The court directed the parties to prepare a stipulated protocol for a search of backup tapes with attention to "concept searching" rather than less efficient "keyword searching."
Calyon v. Mizuho Secs. USA Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36961 (S.D.N.Y. May 18, 2007).
After a review of decisions considering recently-amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a), the court held that a plaintiff's general assertion that its computer forensics expert was more motivated than defendants' expert did not entitle plaintiff to carte blanche access to mirror images of hard drives on defendants' personal computers.
After a review of decisions considering recently-amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a), the court held that a plaintiff's general assertion that its computer forensics expert was more motivated than defendants' expert did not entitle plaintiff to carte blanche access to mirror images of hard drives on defendants' personal computers.
Oklahoma ex rel. Edmondson v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36308 (N.D. Okla. May 17, 2007).
Parties in a federal action in Oklahoma were directed to follow Guidelines for the Discovery of Electronic Stored Information for the District of Kansas pending adoption of local rules or guidelines in the District of Oklahoma for electronic discovery.
Parties in a federal action in Oklahoma were directed to follow Guidelines for the Discovery of Electronic Stored Information for the District of Kansas pending adoption of local rules or guidelines in the District of Oklahoma for electronic discovery.
Rebman v. Follet Higher Education Group, Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32601 (M.D. Fla. May 3, 2007).
A motion to compel a further response to a discovery request that would require defendant to create a special software program to search over 200 million sales transactions was denied due to burdensomeness of the request. However, the court referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and ordered the parties to confer over a more narrow request and to discuss costs of production.
A motion to compel a further response to a discovery request that would require defendant to create a special software program to search over 200 million sales transactions was denied due to burdensomeness of the request. However, the court referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and ordered the parties to confer over a more narrow request and to discuss costs of production.
O'Bar v. Lowe's Home Ctrs., Inc., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32497 (W.D.N.C. May 2, 2007).
In anticipation of electronic discovery disputes between plaintiffs and defendant, a U.S. District Court in North Carolina ordered the parties to prepare a detailed pre-class certification discovery plan under Rule 26(f) while following a proposed electronic discovery protocol from the District of Maryland.
In anticipation of electronic discovery disputes between plaintiffs and defendant, a U.S. District Court in North Carolina ordered the parties to prepare a detailed pre-class certification discovery plan under Rule 26(f) while following a proposed electronic discovery protocol from the District of Maryland.
Bolton v. Sprint/United Mgmt. Co., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16814 (D. Kan. Mar. 8, 2007).
Plaintiffs were entitled to company-wide statistical information in an age-discrimination case. The fact that there were only 13 plaintiffs asking for the information that had been obtained from defendant in cases with over 460 plaintiffs and over 1700 plaintiffs did not affect the relevance of the requested information.
Plaintiffs were entitled to company-wide statistical information in an age-discrimination case. The fact that there were only 13 plaintiffs asking for the information that had been obtained from defendant in cases with over 460 plaintiffs and over 1700 plaintiffs did not affect the relevance of the requested information.
Ameriwood Industries, Inc. v. Liberman, "Ameriwood II", 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10791 (E.D. Mo. Feb. 12, 2007).
Under recently amended Rule 26(b)(2)(B), the court held that information sought in a request for production of documents was not reasonably accessible because the request was unduly burdensome. The court denied defendants' motion to compel production because they failed to show good cause for production through narrow tailoring of their request.
Under recently amended Rule 26(b)(2)(B), the court held that information sought in a request for production of documents was not reasonably accessible because the request was unduly burdensome. The court denied defendants' motion to compel production because they failed to show good cause for production through narrow tailoring of their request.
Best Buy Stores, L.P. v. Developers Diversified Realty Corporation, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7580 (D. Minn. Feb. 1, 2007).
A magistrate's order granting plaintiff's motion to compel production of documents within a month of the order was affirmed despite defendants' objection over two weeks after the order that technological restraints made compliance with the deadline impossible. The magistrate found that defendants offered no proof beyond conclusory statements about costs to retrieve documents from electronic archives and thus had not met their burden under recently-amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) to show that electronic information was not reasonably available.
A magistrate's order granting plaintiff's motion to compel production of documents within a month of the order was affirmed despite defendants' objection over two weeks after the order that technological restraints made compliance with the deadline impossible. The magistrate found that defendants offered no proof beyond conclusory statements about costs to retrieve documents from electronic archives and thus had not met their burden under recently-amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(2)(B) to show that electronic information was not reasonably available.
United States v. N.Y. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93920 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 2006).
Production of email messages had to include non-privileged attachments to the messages.
Production of email messages had to include non-privileged attachments to the messages.
Advante International Corp. v. Mintel Learning Technology,, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86334 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2006).
Defendant's third attempt in a trade secret action to obtain the right to image plaintiff's hard drives was successful following disclosure of evidence that email documents of plaintiff had been altered.
Defendant's third attempt in a trade secret action to obtain the right to image plaintiff's hard drives was successful following disclosure of evidence that email documents of plaintiff had been altered.
Reino de Espana v. American Bureau of Shipping, "Reino II", 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81415 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 3, 2006).
Defendants in an action by Spain to recover oil spill costs were invited to seek sanctions against Spain for failing to preserve government agency documents.
Defendants in an action by Spain to recover oil spill costs were invited to seek sanctions against Spain for failing to preserve government agency documents.
Westcoat v. Bayer CropScience LP, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79756 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 1, 2006).
An agreed order regarding document preservation included definitions of different elements of electronic data systems and provisions for capturing and preserving electronic data in native format. A copy of the order can be found in the Model Orders and Sample Documents section of the ADI Library.
An agreed order regarding document preservation included definitions of different elements of electronic data systems and provisions for capturing and preserving electronic data in native format. A copy of the order can be found in the Model Orders and Sample Documents section of the ADI Library.
Jordan v. Dillard's, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72898 (D. Kan. Oct. 5, 2006).
In a civil rights action against an employer, plaintiff former employee was ordered to produce email with her daughter concerning her employment with defendant. However, defendant's request for production of the former employee's hard drive for inspection was denied because no justification had been provided for the broad and invasive request.
In a civil rights action against an employer, plaintiff former employee was ordered to produce email with her daughter concerning her employment with defendant. However, defendant's request for production of the former employee's hard drive for inspection was denied because no justification had been provided for the broad and invasive request.
In re CV Therapeutics, Inc., Securities Litigation,, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63155 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 22, 2006).
Defendants' de-duplication of over 400,000 documents on belatedly discovered backup drives and application of search terms to the remaining 125,000 documents was permitted as a balance between plaintiff's needs and defendants' burden.
Defendants' de-duplication of over 400,000 documents on belatedly discovered backup drives and application of search terms to the remaining 125,000 documents was permitted as a balance between plaintiff's needs and defendants' burden.
United States v. Hudspeth, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21664 (8th Cir. Aug. 15, 2006).
A search warrant for business records that did not include "computer" as a location to search was sufficiently definite to support search and seizure of a business computer. However, a warrantless search and seizure of defendant's home computer following permission from his wife was not permissible because defendant earlier had denied consent.
A search warrant for business records that did not include "computer" as a location to search was sufficiently definite to support search and seizure of a business computer. However, a warrantless search and seizure of defendant's home computer following permission from his wife was not permissible because defendant earlier had denied consent.
Peskoff v. Faber, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46372 (D.D.C. Jul. 11, 2006).
In light of defendant's inability to account for a two-year gap in emails produced to plaintiff in response to a document demand, the court ordered defendant to create a detailed affidavit describing his search of computerized records. Defendant's blanket statement that no electronic documents had been withheld from was insufficient to allow the court to understand what, if any steps, plaintiff undertook to search for the unaccounted for emails.
In light of defendant's inability to account for a two-year gap in emails produced to plaintiff in response to a document demand, the court ordered defendant to create a detailed affidavit describing his search of computerized records. Defendant's blanket statement that no electronic documents had been withheld from was insufficient to allow the court to understand what, if any steps, plaintiff undertook to search for the unaccounted for emails.
Diepenhorst v. City of Battle Creek, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48551 (W.D. Mich. Jun. 30, 2006).
In a sexual harassment action, defendant's motion to compel forensic examination of plaintiff's computer hard drive was denied. Allowing defense experts to make a mirror image of plaintiff's hard drive was not supported by evidence that plaintiff had destroyed evidence or otherwise failed to meet her discovery obligations.
In a sexual harassment action, defendant's motion to compel forensic examination of plaintiff's computer hard drive was denied. Allowing defense experts to make a mirror image of plaintiff's hard drive was not supported by evidence that plaintiff had destroyed evidence or otherwise failed to meet her discovery obligations.
Benson v. St. Joseph Regional Health Center, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28795 (N.D. Tex. May 1, 2006).
A motion to compel additional electronic searches in an action related to a hospital's peer review process was denied because statements under oath from the hospital and statements by hospital counsel to the court that all responsive documents had been produced were presumed, in the absence of any showing to the contrary, to have been made with a good faith belief in their truthfulness.
A motion to compel additional electronic searches in an action related to a hospital's peer review process was denied because statements under oath from the hospital and statements by hospital counsel to the court that all responsive documents had been produced were presumed, in the absence of any showing to the contrary, to have been made with a good faith belief in their truthfulness.
Floeter v. City of Orlando, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19577 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 14, 2006).
A city was not required to allow a search of city computer hard drives by a plaintiff in a sexual harassment action because plaintiff had not shown that the city had failed to produce information on the hard drives.
A city was not required to allow a search of city computer hard drives by a plaintiff in a sexual harassment action because plaintiff had not shown that the city had failed to produce information on the hard drives.
Treppel v. Biovail Corp., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4407 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2006).
Although plaintiff's request for an order to prevent the destruction of evidence was premature due to the lack of evidence that any potentially relevant documents had been destroyed, the court ordered defendant to respond to a document retention questionnaire that exceeded a 25 interrogatory limit, to explain its search protocol, and to produce responsive documents.
Although plaintiff's request for an order to prevent the destruction of evidence was premature due to the lack of evidence that any potentially relevant documents had been destroyed, the court ordered defendant to respond to a document retention questionnaire that exceeded a 25 interrogatory limit, to explain its search protocol, and to produce responsive documents.
In re ATM Fee Antitrust Litigation, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36195 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2005).
A bank holding company was ordered to produce documents of its wholly-owned subsidiaries due to the company's legal control of its subsidiaries.
A bank holding company was ordered to produce documents of its wholly-owned subsidiaries due to the company's legal control of its subsidiaries.
Innovative Piledriving Products, LLC v. Unisto Oy, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23652 (N.D. Ind. Oct. 14, 2005).
A plaintiff that asserted there were no responsive documents that had not been produced was ordered to at least provide an affidavit in response to a discovery request. The affidavit had to detail efforts of the plaintiff to locate, retrieve and restore responsive electronic data that apparently was automatically deleted from plaintiff's computer system.
A plaintiff that asserted there were no responsive documents that had not been produced was ordered to at least provide an affidavit in response to a discovery request. The affidavit had to detail efforts of the plaintiff to locate, retrieve and restore responsive electronic data that apparently was automatically deleted from plaintiff's computer system.
United States ex rel. Smith v. Boeing Co., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36890 (D. Kan. Aug. 31, 2005).
In an action under the False Claims Act, the court declined to issue a preservation order requiring a defendant to preserve electronic evidence for discovery and trial. The court was persuaded that the defendant had taken appropriate steps to preserve evidence within days after learning of the lawsuit and a preservation order was unnecessary.
In an action under the False Claims Act, the court declined to issue a preservation order requiring a defendant to preserve electronic evidence for discovery and trial. The court was persuaded that the defendant had taken appropriate steps to preserve evidence within days after learning of the lawsuit and a preservation order was unnecessary.
In re Crompton Corp. Securities Litigation, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23002 (D. Conn. Aug. 16, 2005)
A federal district court ordered the plaintiff in a state shareholder derivative action to return about 2.5 million pages of electronic discovery provided pursuant to an order of the state court by the defendant several days prior to the federal court's stay of discovery in the state action pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
A federal district court ordered the plaintiff in a state shareholder derivative action to return about 2.5 million pages of electronic discovery provided pursuant to an order of the state court by the defendant several days prior to the federal court's stay of discovery in the state action pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
BG Real Estate Services, Inc. v. American Equity Insurance Company, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10330 (E.D. La. May 18, 2005).
Because a computer hard-drive sought in a discovery request was included in the "other data compilations" referenced in Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a), if particular non-privileged items on the hard drive were responsive to other requests for production as to which the objections were not sustained, those items were ordered translated through detection devices into reasonably usable form and then produced.
Because a computer hard-drive sought in a discovery request was included in the "other data compilations" referenced in Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a), if particular non-privileged items on the hard drive were responsive to other requests for production as to which the objections were not sustained, those items were ordered translated through detection devices into reasonably usable form and then produced.
Jinks-Umstead v. England,, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5813 (D.D.C. Apr. 7, 2005).
Plaintiff, a head contracting officer, claimed in a Title VII Civil Rights action that the Navy took away her supervisory status for discriminatory and retaliatory reasons. Following plaintiff's presentation of her case at trial, the Navy produced for the first time approximately 1,400 pages of "work in place" reports used to determine support staff requirements and relevant to the litigation.. Prior to the trial, the Navy had erroneously claimed it no longer had the reports.
Plaintiff, a head contracting officer, claimed in a Title VII Civil Rights action that the Navy took away her supervisory status for discriminatory and retaliatory reasons. Following plaintiff's presentation of her case at trial, the Navy produced for the first time approximately 1,400 pages of "work in place" reports used to determine support staff requirements and relevant to the litigation.. Prior to the trial, the Navy had erroneously claimed it no longer had the reports.
Weiller v. New York Life Ins. Co., 2005 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 473 (N.Y. Cty. Sup. Ct. Mar. 16, 2005).
A disability insurer was ordered in a class action filed in a New York state court to preserve documents and data. The insurer's counsel had agreed to preserve the documents and data but declined to agree to an order on the basis that the insurer already was subject to preservation orders in multidistrict federal litigation and to requirements under the securities laws for preserving documents. The New York court held that scenarios could arise in which federal preservation orders might not provide sufficient protection for the plaintiff in the New York action.
A disability insurer was ordered in a class action filed in a New York state court to preserve documents and data. The insurer's counsel had agreed to preserve the documents and data but declined to agree to an order on the basis that the insurer already was subject to preservation orders in multidistrict federal litigation and to requirements under the securities laws for preserving documents. The New York court held that scenarios could arise in which federal preservation orders might not provide sufficient protection for the plaintiff in the New York action.
Bieler v. Amco Ins. Co., 2005 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 759 (Mont. Dist. Ct. Jan. 1, 2005).
A protective order was granted barring a deposition of an insurer about its efforts to respond to plaintiff's discovery requests because how the insurer handled the litigation was not relevant to the issues in the litigation. However, the court ordered the insurer to produce a printout of the "history" of electronic documents that were produced to the plaintiff.
A protective order was granted barring a deposition of an insurer about its efforts to respond to plaintiff's discovery requests because how the insurer handled the litigation was not relevant to the issues in the litigation. However, the court ordered the insurer to produce a printout of the "history" of electronic documents that were produced to the plaintiff.
Sempra Energy Trading Corp. v. Brown, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24483 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2004).
A discovery order in a state administrative proceeding that could require a company to pay over $4 million to restore and review electronic documents was not an "extraordinary circumstance" that would outweigh a federal court's obligation not to interfere in state proceedings.
A discovery order in a state administrative proceeding that could require a company to pay over $4 million to restore and review electronic documents was not an "extraordinary circumstance" that would outweigh a federal court's obligation not to interfere in state proceedings.
Peter Rosenbaum Photography Corp. v. Otto Doosan Mail Order Ltd., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24292 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 30, 2004).
Bankruptcy rules did not relieve a party in bankruptcy from the obligation to respond to a subpoena for electronic documents.
Bankruptcy rules did not relieve a party in bankruptcy from the obligation to respond to a subpoena for electronic documents.
Judicial Watch, Inc. v. United States Department of Justice,, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20141 (D.C. October 7, 2004).
The court held that the United States had a duty to release segregable portions of nine privileged emails pursuant to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
The court held that the United States had a duty to release segregable portions of nine privileged emails pursuant to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Beacon Hill Asset Management LLC, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15031 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 3, 2004).
In an SEC enforcement action, a printout from a contacts management program had to be produced despite a claim of privilege. The document had not been included on a privilege log, and the fact that the document had not been printed out before the due date for the privilege log did not mean the documents did not exist before the due date. Failure to include the document on the privilege log in a timely manner meant production of the document would be required.
In an SEC enforcement action, a printout from a contacts management program had to be produced despite a claim of privilege. The document had not been included on a privilege log, and the fact that the document had not been printed out before the due date for the privilege log did not mean the documents did not exist before the due date. Failure to include the document on the privilege log in a timely manner meant production of the document would be required.
In re Search of 3817 W. West End, 321 F. Supp. 2d 953 (N.D. Ill. 2004).
While a court agreed with the government that there was probable cause to believe a computer in a private residence contained evidence of alleged tax fraud, the court barred the government from searching the seized computer without first filing a protocol with the court showing how a search of irrelevant information would be avoided.
While a court agreed with the government that there was probable cause to believe a computer in a private residence contained evidence of alleged tax fraud, the court barred the government from searching the seized computer without first filing a protocol with the court showing how a search of irrelevant information would be avoided.
In re Lowe's Companies, Inc. and Lowe's Home Centers, Inc., 2004 Tex. App. LEXIS 4432 (Tex. App., May 18, 2004).
An order directing a company representative to provide access during her deposition to a database of falling merchandise accidents was vacated because the access was not limited as to time, place, or subject matter. Tex. R. Civ. P. 196.4 required a specific request for production of electronic data in a specific form.
An order directing a company representative to provide access during her deposition to a database of falling merchandise accidents was vacated because the access was not limited as to time, place, or subject matter. Tex. R. Civ. P. 196.4 required a specific request for production of electronic data in a specific form.
Jicarilla Apache Nation v. U.S., 2004 U.S. Claims LEXIS 86 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2004).
Discovery order sets forth parameters for production of electronic data, including procedures for designating electronic records as responsive, and considerations for form of production for electronic discovery documents.
Discovery order sets forth parameters for production of electronic data, including procedures for designating electronic records as responsive, and considerations for form of production for electronic discovery documents.
Giardina v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4160 (E.D. La. Feb. 26, 2003).
Defendant required to create report of Internet sites accessed with company computers in response to plaintiff's employment discrimination claim.
Defendant required to create report of Internet sites accessed with company computers in response to plaintiff's employment discrimination claim.
Dodge, Warren & Peters Ins. Services, Inc. v. Riley, 105 Cal. App. 4th 1414, 130 Cal. Rptr. 2d 385, 2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 171, 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1171, 2003 D.A.R. 1447, 19 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1143 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. Feb. 5, 2003).
Preliminary injunction requiring party to preserve electronic evidence for use in future discovery upheld by court of appeals.
Preliminary injunction requiring party to preserve electronic evidence for use in future discovery upheld by court of appeals.
Marcin Eng'g, LLC v. Founders at Grizzly Ranch, LLC, 219 F.R.D. 516 (D. Colo. 2003).
Builders of a master planned community, facing summary judgment in an action by an engineering company for payment for services, were not entitled to reopen expert discovery for review of preliminary computerized engineering studies that the builders sought. The engineering company would not be using the computerized information at trial, and the builders had been dilatory in reviewing hard copy final plans and in claiming production by the company had been incomplete.
Builders of a master planned community, facing summary judgment in an action by an engineering company for payment for services, were not entitled to reopen expert discovery for review of preliminary computerized engineering studies that the builders sought. The engineering company would not be using the computerized information at trial, and the builders had been dilatory in reviewing hard copy final plans and in claiming production by the company had been incomplete.
In re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Sec. Litig., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26446 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 31, 2002).
Defendant ordered to provide written explanation of all steps taken to locate responsive email messages in discovery.
Defendant ordered to provide written explanation of all steps taken to locate responsive email messages in discovery.
Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Fin. Corp., 306 F.3d 99, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 20422, 53 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 1105 (2d Cir. Conn. Sept. 26, 2002).
Sanctions for negligence in failing to produce electronic information, including information from backup tapes.
Sanctions for negligence in failing to produce electronic information, including information from backup tapes.
DeLoach v. Philip Morris Cos., 206 F.R.D. 568, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7274, 52 Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 442 (M.D.N.C. Apr. 3, 2002).
Party failed to produce computerized data its expert relied upon.
Party failed to produce computerized data its expert relied upon.
In re Pac. Gateway Exch., Inc. Sec. Litig., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18433 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2001).
Risk of destruction of electronic evidence basis for lifting stay of discovery.
Risk of destruction of electronic evidence basis for lifting stay of discovery.
Superior Consultant Co. v. Bailey, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13051 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 22, 2000).
Former employee ordered to produce backup of laptop.
Former employee ordered to produce backup of laptop.
Alexander v. FBI, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22561 (D.C. July 10, 1998).
The court ordered a search of the hard drive and server of a federal employee in a Privacy Act action against the federal government to determine whether documents that had not been produced actually existed.
The court ordered a search of the hard drive and server of a federal employee in a Privacy Act action against the federal government to determine whether documents that had not been produced actually existed.
Cerruti 1881 S.A. v. Cerruti, Inc., 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18712 (S.D. N.Y. December 17, 1996).
A court-appointed computer expert found that defendants had fabricated and manipulated discovery records on a computer disk for the purpose of making it difficult for the expert to find any fabricated material.
A court-appointed computer expert found that defendants had fabricated and manipulated discovery records on a computer disk for the purpose of making it difficult for the expert to find any fabricated material.
PHE, Inc. v. Department of Justice, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16382 (D.C. November 14, 1991).
Plaintiffs were ordered to produce computerized tax records even though plaintiffs possessed no computer program to retrieve or display the records; the production would not be overly burdensome and the expenditures would be modest.
Plaintiffs were ordered to produce computerized tax records even though plaintiffs possessed no computer program to retrieve or display the records; the production would not be overly burdensome and the expenditures would be modest.
Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, 482 U.S. 522 (1987).
Although the Hague Evidence Convention applied to production of documents by foreign corporations in signatory nations, the Convention supplemented rather than replaced other methods of discovery provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. U.S. District Courts had jurisdiction to order production of documents by foreign litigants under the Federal Rules despite foreign “blocking” statutes and availability of alternative means under the Convention to obtain evidence from abroad.
Although the Hague Evidence Convention applied to production of documents by foreign corporations in signatory nations, the Convention supplemented rather than replaced other methods of discovery provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. U.S. District Courts had jurisdiction to order production of documents by foreign litigants under the Federal Rules despite foreign “blocking” statutes and availability of alternative means under the Convention to obtain evidence from abroad.
Byrne v. Byrne, 168 Misc. 2d 321, 1996 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 180 (N.Y.S. April 25, 1996).
In divorce proceeding wife was allowed to download files from husband's notebook computer.
In divorce proceeding wife was allowed to download files from husband's notebook computer.
Daewoo Electronics Co., Ltd. v. United States, 650 F. Supp. 1003 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986).
In an antidumping proceeding involving color television sets from Korea, the Department of Commerce was ordered to provide an electronics manufacturer with copies of computer tapes used by Commerce in its administrative review. Turning over reels of tape that did not include distillation of data from the tapes was an inadequate response. The court held that an order to disclose computer tapes should have been understood to include disclosure of all further refined forms of electronic storage of the data.
In an antidumping proceeding involving color television sets from Korea, the Department of Commerce was ordered to provide an electronics manufacturer with copies of computer tapes used by Commerce in its administrative review. Turning over reels of tape that did not include distillation of data from the tapes was an inadequate response. The court held that an order to disclose computer tapes should have been understood to include disclosure of all further refined forms of electronic storage of the data.
United States v. International Business Machines Corp., 1977 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14605 (S.D. N.Y. August 5, 1977).
A computer company was ordered to produce specified information and a computer examiner was also appointed due to the highly technical and complex nature of the production.
A computer company was ordered to produce specified information and a computer examiner was also appointed due to the highly technical and complex nature of the production.
