How spoliation standards affect corporations filing sanctions

http://ow.ly/6QnGS

Article by Michael Kozubek on insidecounsel.com.

This article discusses the case of Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, which defined the extent of the duty to preserve potentially relevant electronically stored information (ESI) for e-discovery.

The author also discusses three other recent precedent cases in the article and states, "However, not all motions for sanctions alleging the opposing party deleted ESI while under a duty to preserve it—a practice known as spoliation—are successful. Two recent cases provide guidance on how and how not to file motions for spoliation sanctions, and a third case clarifies how to file a preservation order requiring the opposing party to preserve ESI."

The other cases discussed are Am. Nat’l Prop. & Cas. Co. v. Campbell Ins, Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Country Gourmet Foods, and Haraburda v. Arcelor Mittal USA.

Another case is also discussed, "Failure to preserve ESI when litigation is imminent can result in very costly penalties, particularly if the court has other issues with your case.

In Eon-Net v. Flagstar Bancorp, the Federal Circuit affirmed in July a district court decision that assessed almost a half million dollars against a patent licensing and litigation firm and its attorneys for litigation misconduct, including failure to preserve documents.

After discovery closed in some patent infringement cases it had filed, Eon- Net destroyed all inventor and nonpublic prosecution records. The company then instituted a data retention policy, which resulted in the company keeping no records, despite the fact it had other infringement actions pending."