In Annex Books v. City of Indianapolis [pdf], No. 1:03-cv-918 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 14, 2012) [pdf], U.S. Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker granted the defendants’ motion to compel the plaintiffs’ bookkeeping data, but held that the defendants would be required to pay all future costs and expenses associated with additional attempts to compile or import the data.

The plaintiffs, a group of adult bookstores and newsstands, sued the defendant city over its zoning ordinance.  The defendant sought the plaintiffs’ bookkeeping records, but the defendant had problems reviewing the data using their own software.  However, the plaintiffs demonstrated that they made significant efforts to produce the data in a reasonable usable format including hiring two forensic computer vendors to compile the data and purchasing the defendant’s review software in an effort to import the data into the defendant’s preferred software.

The court held that the plaintiffs ordinarily maintained their accounting records on a server known as “Platinum” while the defendant used Quickbooks.  The programs were not compatible and therefore data could not be imported from Platinum to Quickbooks. The court held that the plaintiff made a good faith effort to comply with its discovery obligations, but that the data was “not reasonably accessible” due to undue cost and burden under FRCP 26(b)(2)(B).  While the court found that the defendant had demonstrated “good cause” to warrant the production of the bookkeeping data, the court ordered the defendant to pay the cost of any further production efforts related to the data.