If you don’t produce and then take multiple steps to hide relevant data, in most instances the court will issue significant e-discovery sanctions against you.
In this copyright infringement case, the plaintiffs motioned for e-discovery sanctions against the defendant for a variety of misconduct including spoliation and hiding evidence.
The defendants, including Jimi’s brother, started a marijuana business and were attempting to use Jimi Hendrix’s image to sell their products. The estate of Jimi Hendrix, the plaintiffs, challenged the use of Jimi’s image, and within e-discovery, there were numerous incidents of “non-compliance with basic discovery obligations” by the defendants, which included:
After three court orders and continuing failure of the defendant to produce all relevant data, the plaintiffs motioned for case dismissal or an adverse inference jury instruction.
Download the PDF version of Experience Hendrix, LLC et al. v. Pitsicali et al. case law alert here.
A litigation party’s use of specialized anti-forensic or deletion software on files likely to contain relevant information will almost always provide courts with a sufficient basis to find an “intent to deprive another party,” opening the door to imposing on the offending party the severe sanctions permitted under FRCP 37(e)(2).