Mobile Forensic Analysis in Premises Liability Mobile Forensic Analysis in Premises Liability
Client: A Major Insurance Company
Industry: Insurance
Services Provided: Forensic Analysis, E-Discovery
Summary: Defend against a fraudulent premises liability claim involving intentional data deletion by the
claimant
Result: Case settled favorably for the client during mediation
Background: Relevant Data Technologies (RDT) was enlisted by an insurance company to assist in a
premises liability case involving their insured, an apartment complex. The claimant had filed a lawsuit
alleging damages due to an accident within the complex. However, it was suspected that the claimant
had intentionally deleted key data from her mobile device to manipulate evidence in her favor.
Challenge: During the legal proceedings, the opposing attorney engaged a forensic expert who failed to
release any data from the claimant’s device, citing technical difficulties. This expert was also accused
of covering up the fact that the claimant had a legal duty to preserve the data and had nonetheless
engaged in spoliation.
Engagement: RDT was tasked with evaluating the integrity of the forensic work previously done by the
opposing expert. The analysis by RDT revealed several critical errors:
1. Inferior Imaging: The opposing expert had used incorrect forensic software to create a physical image
of the phone, which failed to capture all necessary data reliably.
2. Improper Access and Review: The expert had accessed the device manually, unlocking the phone
and directly checking settings, which not only jeopardized the data integrity but also potentially
overwrote key evidence.
The settings on the claimant’s phone, particularly those configured to automatically delete text
messages after 30 days, were of crucial importance. RDT’s examination demonstrated that these
settings had been altered around the time of the alleged accident.
Findings: RDT conducted a comprehensive forensic examination using correct imaging techniques to
create an accurate reflection of the device’s data without altering or damaging the existing data. This
contrast in methodology highlighted the flaws in the opposing expert’s approach.
The findings were compiled into an affidavit detailing how the opposing expert’s actions constituted
spoliation of evidence.
RDT’s report included:
1. Evidence of improper handling and potential alteration of data by the opposing expert.
2. Confirmation of settings changes that were critical to the case.
Case Study 5
Outcome: Armed with detailed forensic evidence and expert testimony from RDT, the insurance
company was able to confront the opposing party with substantial proof of data spoliation and
mishandling during mediation. Facing the likelihood of a court ruling on the evidence mishandling, the
opposing party chose to settle the case favorably for RDT’s client.
Conclusion: This case underscores the vital importance of employing proper forensic techniques in
legal disputes involving digital data. RDT’s expertise in mobile forensic analysis and their ability to
expose deficiencies in the work of the opposing expert were decisive in achieving a favorable outcome
for the client. This case study highlights how critical accurate digital forensics are in maintaining the
integrity of legal processes and ensuring just outcomes in disputes involving electronic data
