Electronically Stored Information in Bankruptcy Cases - An Ounce of Prevention
by Steven Jack McCardell
Mabey Murray LC; Salt Lake City
Discovery of electronically stored information is by no means a new issue. As U.S. District Court Judge J. Thomas Greene commented 20 years ago, “it is now axiomatic that electronically stored information is discoverable under Rule 34 . . . computer stored information has become involved in every type of litigation.” Bills v. Kennecott Corp., 108 F.R.D. 459, 461 (D. Utah 1985). See also 7 Moore’s Federal Practice §34.12[3] (“computer records and other electronically stored data are clearly within the permissible scope of discovery. Rule 34 was amended in 1970 to include ‘data compilations from which information can be obtained, translated, if necessary, by the respondent through detection devices into reasonably usable form’”); Ch. 37A, Discovery of Computer-Based Information (3d Ed. 2005). What, then, is new?
2006 Annual Spring Meeting Minutes
The ABI Technology and Telecommunications Committee met on Saturday April 22, 2006, in Washington, D.C. There were nine members present including William K. Snyder, co-chair of the committee, with a visit from immediate past president John Penn.
The primary subjects covered were:
- The expanded charter of the committee, which now includes the use of technology in bankruptcy practice; ideas to explore in that area are: (a) adding a resource center to the ABI Web site for ABI members that provides digital and technology solutions to bankruptcy practitioners, such as electronic data rooms; (b) adding a FAQ section for technology questions; (c) negotiating a middle-market solution for schedules and claims processing for bankruptcy cases; (d) getting a periodical like PC Magazine to sponsor an “Ask a Geek” question for phones and PDA users; and (e) getting ABI to announce the charter expansion and ask for new members to join the committee.
- The ABI handbook for technology and high-tech cases: (a) send out the outline to the members to get authors, and (b) add a section that covers how the new law affects cases.
- BAPCPA effects on technology filings: (a) discussions revolving around utilities, KERPs, reclamation claims, real estate and exclusivity determined that the primary issues involve utility designations and KERPs; (b) can a telecom provider be designated a utility?; and (c) how can key employees in technology companies be retained?
- Upcoming articles: Patty Tamasco offered to tackle the issue in 3(b) above concerning the designation of utilities.
The committee will need an additional author to answer the question in 3(c) above concerning KERPs.