Strasser v. Yalamanchi
669 So.2d 1142 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A party seeking to inspect an opposing party's computer system for deleted data must present evidence demonstrating a likelihood that the information is retrievable. If such a showing is made, any court order compelling inspection must be narrowly tailored, defining the parameters of the search and including safeguards to protect confidential information and prevent harm to the system.
Facts:
- Dr. Bose Yalamanchi and Dr. Eugene J. Strasser, both plastic surgeons, had a contractually-based working arrangement.
- The contract provided that Yalamanchi was to receive 50% of the collections from his gross billings.
- On August 31, 1991, Yalamanchi terminated the contract to start his own practice, leading to a dispute over the final financial accounting.
- Strasser maintained patient billing, receivables, and other financial information on a computer system using a software program called Medifax.
- An employee of Strasser's had purged old data from the computer system multiple times over several years in the ordinary course of business to free up hard drive space.
- Strasser claimed the specific financial information Yalamanchi sought had been purged and was no longer in his possession.
- Yalamanchi's expert, a CPA, stated it was theoretically possible to retrieve purged data from a computer system.
- Strasser's expert, a certified netware engineer who examined the system, concluded that the purged data was irretrievable because the Medifax software overwrites deleted files and the system's hard drive was nearly full.
Procedural Posture:
- Bose Yalamanchi, M.D., P.A. (plaintiff) sued Eugene J. Strasser, M.D., P.A. (defendant) in a Florida trial court regarding a contractual dispute.
- During discovery, Yalamanchi filed a Request for Entry on Designated Property, seeking to inspect and test Strasser's computer system.
- Strasser filed an objection to the request, arguing it was overbroad, burdensome, and invasive of confidential information.
- After a hearing, the trial court overruled Strasser's objections and granted Yalamanchi's motion for unrestricted access to the computer system.
- Strasser (petitioner) filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, asking it to quash the trial court's discovery order.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a discovery order that grants a party unrestricted access to an opposing party's computer system to search for purportedly purged data, without any protective limitations or a preliminary showing that the data is likely retrievable, constitute a departure from the essential requirements of law?
Opinions:
Majority - Pariente, J.
Yes. A discovery order granting unrestricted access to a party's computer system without safeguards or a sufficient evidentiary showing constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law. The trial court's order allowed for a 'wholesale intrusion' into Strasser's computer system, which created a risk of irreparable harm. This harm includes the potential disclosure of confidential patient information, protected by statute, and proprietary business records unrelated to the litigation, as well as the risk of damage to the computer system itself through file deletion or viruses. Before ordering such an intrusive inspection, the requesting party must present evidence establishing a likelihood that the purged documents can be retrieved, and the trial court must find no less intrusive means are available. Even if Yalamanchi had met this burden, which he did not, any resulting order must define specific parameters of time and scope and include access restrictions to protect confidentiality and prevent damage to the system.
Analysis:
This case is an early and significant decision in the field of electronic discovery. It establishes that direct forensic examination of an opposing party's computer system is an extraordinary and highly intrusive discovery measure, not a routine right. The court's holding created a high bar for parties seeking such access, requiring an evidentiary showing of likely success before a court will even consider it. This decision set a precedent for balancing the broad scope of discovery against legitimate concerns for privacy, confidentiality, and the integrity of electronic data systems, influencing the development of rules and best practices for e-discovery for years to come.
Unlock the full brief for Strasser v. Yalamanchi