Ferenbach, Cam, United States Magistrate Judge
Trial court granted defendant’s motion to compel information from plaintiff’s Facebook and MySpace accounts because information was relevant to plaintiff’s allegations that she suffered emotional distress and decreased physical capabilities.
Plaintiff brought negligence and product liability claims against defendants after being involved in an automobile accident. Plaintiff argued that defendants manufactured defective seatbelt and airbag systems and that the defective systems contributed to or caused her injuries, including a stroke that resulted in paralysis of the right side of her body. Plaintiff also claimed that the stroke and other injuries caused a loss of quality and enjoyment of life and emotional distress because plaintiff could no longer engage in physical activities or play the violin.
Defendants sought “complete and un-redacted copies of Plaintiff’s Facebook and other social networking site accounts,” including “wall posts, photographs, and messages” from the date of the accident to the present. Before commencing discovery, defendants claimed they had obtained “wall posts and photographs from Plaintiff’s public Facebook profile that ‘provide[d] evidence of Plaintiff’s post-accident social activities, mental state, relationship history, living arrangements, and rehabilitative progress.’” Defendants claimed this information was relevant to the lawsuit in so far as it negated plaintiff’s claims that she had suffered emotional distress and a loss of quality and enjoyment of life. However, plaintiff claimed that information from her social networking accounts was irrelevant and merely a “broad fishing expedition.”
The court held pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 (b) (1) that information from plaintiff’s social networking accounts was relevant and discoverable because the “alleged consequences of Plaintiff’s injuries include[d] severe physical injuries, emotional distress, and impaired quality of life,” and “evidence relating to Plaintiff’s physical capabilities and social activities [was] relevant to Plaintiff’s claims.”
The court ordered plaintiff to upload all information from her social networking accounts onto an electronic storage device and provide it to the defense along with an index of redacted communications. The court also ordered the defense to not disclose plaintiff’s social networking information to anyone with the exception of support staff. And the court ordered that the defense could not make a copy of the storage device and following resolution of discovery or litigation, required to return the electronic storage device to plaintiff.
v.
AUTOLIV ASP, INC., et al., Defendants
Counsel
Clay Robbins, III, Magana, Cathcart & McCarthy, Los Angeles, CA, Edward J. Achrem, Edward J. Achrem & Associates, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff.Michael E. Stoberski, Olson Cannon, Gormley & Desruisseaux, Las Vegas, NV, David R. Tippetts, Katheryne R. Mardock, Weinstein Tippetts & Little LLP, Houston, TX, for Defendants.