Skretny, William M., United States District Judge
Trial court denied defendants' motion to compel the "friend" list from a victim's Facebook page after the plaintiff had already produced all 2000 pages of the account. Defendants' argued the "friends" list was relevant to assessing the victim's son's Asperger's Disorder, particularly his ability to socialize and communicate with others.
This is the third discovery motion (involving other victims) and the second dealing with ESI stemming from the crash of Flight 3407 on February 12, 2009. The victim, together with the other 44 passengers and crew on board, died when the plane crashed into a house on final approach to the Buffalo Niagara International Airport. All pending actions resulting from the crash were consolidated for discovery in an MDL under Judge Skretny in the Western District of New York.
The court was not convinced of the relevance:
Given the ease with which “friends” can be collected on Facebook—indeed, one can be “friends” with people known to them, with strangers, with celebrities, with animals, and even with inanimate objects—Colgan's argument that Kevin's “friend list” is relevant to assessing his ability to socialize and communicate is unpersuasive. There seems little likelihood of a correlation between the number of one's virtual Facebook friends and one's ability to socialize and communicate in the real world. To the extent Kevin's Facebook presence contributes to an assessment of his Asperger's Disorder, Plaintiff's Facebook production thus far, which includes every post, picture, and message, is adequate. Kevin's “friend list” adds nothing meaningful and Plaintiff is therefore not required to produce it. Plaintiff has not, however, demonstrated that supplementing her Facebook production is unduly burdensome under Rule 26(b)(2)(C). She therefore remains subject to the supplemental disclosure requirements of Rule 26(e)(1).Defendants also sought judicial issuance of a subpoena to Yahoo to recover the victim's email account. Plaintiff did not oppose the request, but Yahoo! was unwilling to provide the account without a subpoena. The court found that the victim's account may have been purged due to inactivity, but "given the lack of opposition and this Court's previous finding that electronic communications may be relevant to loss of support claims" the clerk would issue the subpoena.