| Case Citation: |
City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp., 222 F.R.D. 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2004) |
| Nature of Case: |
City and families of shooting victims sued manufacturers, distributors and retailers of weapons |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Database maintained by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Court denied BATF’s motion to quash subpoenas since firearms tracing and licensing data maintained by BATF in federal databases was relevant and would be subject to a confidentiality order, and disclosure of the data was not precluded by appropriations statute or by law enforcement privilege |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion for Protective Order; Third Party Discovery |
|
| Case Citation: |
Columbus McKinnon Corp. v. HealthNow New York, Inc., 2006 WL 2827675 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2006) |
| Nature of Case: |
Breach of contract |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Billing records, backup tapes, DVDs |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Court rejected defendant’s excuses for extended delay in producing itemization of withdrawals in a format usable by plaintiff, and ordered defendant to reimburse plaintiff for the reasonable cost of attorneys’ fees incurred in moving for contempt of court’s prior order |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion for Sanctions; Backup Tapes; Format of Production |
|
| Case Citation: |
Floyd v. City of New York, 2008 WL 4179210 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 10, 2008) |
| Nature of Case: |
Class action alleging defendants sanction a policy and practice of stop and frisks by the New York Police Department on the basis of race and ethnicity |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
NYPD database |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Where all information in particular NYPD database was relevant to plaintiffs’ claims and not subject to law enforcement privilege, court granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of data with exception of names of suspects and police officers and subject in part to protective order to be negotiated by parties or imposed by court |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion to Compel; Motion for Protective Order |
|
| Case Citation: |
Karim v. Natural Stone Indus., Inc., 2008 WL 429627 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 18, 2008) |
| Nature of Case: |
Injured construction worker sued for violations of New York Labor Law and for common law negligence |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Plaintiff’s home computer |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Where computer hard drive was not relevant and material to plaintiff’s ability to return to employment, evidence regarding plaintiff’s employability was ascertainable by other means, and it would be impossible to discern plaintiff’s computer usage beyond the use testified to at deposition given that several members of plaintiff’s household also used the computer, court denied as improperly invasive third-party defendant’s request for a “clone” of plaintiff’s home computer hard drive |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion to Compel; Mirror Image |
|
| Case Citation: |
Lipco Elec. Corp. v. ASG Consulting Corp., 2004 WL 1949062 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 18, 2004) (Unpublished) |
| Nature of Case: |
Claims based on breach of contract and for an accounting |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Computer data |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Noting differences between federal law and New York law regarding cost-shifting in discovery, court stated it did not have sufficient information about the costs associated with the requested discovery, but concluded that until plaintiffs indicated a willingness to pay for the requested electronic discovery (whatever its cost), court would not order its production |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion to Compel; Motion for Protective Order; Cost Shifting; Format of Production |
|
| Case Citation: |
MacNamara v. City of New York, 2006 WL 3298911 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 2006) |
| Nature of Case: |
Litigation arising from arrests during 2004 Republican National Convention |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Worksheets underlying database |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Court ordered production of handwritten worksheets used to compile database in light of demonstrated data entry errors that made accuracy of database printouts suspect; court also sustained objection to request for “all electronic data concerning RNC arrests” as impermissibly vague |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion to Compel; Records Retention Policy |
|
| Case Citation: |
MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 2010 WL 447051 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 14, 2010) |
| Nature of Case: |
|
| Electronic Data Involved: |
ESI |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Upon defendant’s motion for a protective order to require plaintiff to bear the cost of defendant’s production of electronically stored information (“ESI”), the court declined to follow the purportedly “well settled rule” in New York that the party seeking discovery should bear the cost and denied defendant’s motion |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Local Rule; Motion for Protective Order; Cost Shifting |
|
| Case Citation: |
MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 2010 WL 447051 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Jan. 14, 2010) |
| Nature of Case: |
|
| Electronic Data Involved: |
ESI |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Upon defendant’s motion for a protective order to require plaintiff to bear the cost of defendant’s production of electronically stored information (“ESI”), the court declined to follow the purportedly “well settled rule” in New York that the party seeking discovery should bear the cost and denied defendant’s motion |
| Case Summary: |
Available |
| Attributes: |
Local Rule; Motion for Protective Order; Cost Shifting |
|
| Case Citation: |
Papyrus Tech. Corp. v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc., 2005 WL 1606059 (S.D.N.Y. July 7, 2005) |
| Nature of Case: |
|
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Computer files |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of additional computer files denied where plaintiff offered no basis either for excusing delay or for deeming the files in question to be so significant as to justify reopening discovery more than five months after its close |
| Case Summary: |
Not Available |
| Attributes: |
Motion to Compel |
|
| Case Citation: |
PSEG Power New York, Inc. v. Alberici Constructors, Inc., 2007 WL 2687670 (N.D.N.Y. Sept. 7, 2007) |
| Nature of Case: |
Construction litigation |
| Electronic Data Involved: |
Email and their attachments |
| E-Discovery Issue: |
Where technical glitch experienced by party’s e-discovery vendor resulted in thousands of emails being “divorced” from their attachments at time of production, and various potential solutions attempted by the parties proved unsuccessful, court found that re-production of such emails was warranted and that producing party should bear full cost of such re-production |
| Case Summary: |
Available |
| Attributes: |
FRCP 26(b)(2)(B) “Not Reasonably Accessible”; Motion to Compel; Cost Shifting; Spoliation; Format of Production |
|