eDiscovery Case of the Week: Moore v. Miller

by Julia Romero Peter, Esq.

In Moore v. Miller, No.: 10-cv-651-JLK, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79568 (D. Colo. June 6, 2013), the court ordered Plaintiff to produce his Facebook history, including activity log, from the time of his arrest until the end of discovery.  The court also granted Defendants leave to file a motion for attorney fees incurred from the instant motion and their motion to compel. 


In their motion to compel, Defendants requested Plaintiff’s Facebook and other website writings related to his arrest.  In response to the court’s order granting the motion, Plaintiff produced “only some of [his] writings, including an incomplete and highly-redacted printout of Plaintiff’s Facebook wall posts. ”  In addition, Plaintiff failed to produce his activity log.

Plaintiff asserted that the order required that he produce only “writings about his arrest” and accordingly, he had complied with the order.  The court disagreed, stating, “[n]arrowing discovery only to writings about Mr. Moore’s arrest . . . would exclude writings relevant to the arrest such as writings relating to Mr. Moore’s bias, emotional and physical states before and after the arrest and his alleged physical and mental injuries.”  In the underlying case, Plaintiff claimed damages for emotional pain and suffering, physical pain and humiliation.  He posted his story online and in various forums, describing his arrest and “what he alleges happened to him” in addition to “the injuries he allegedly suffers to this day.”  Thus, the court determined that Defendants have a right to know about these statements.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.