Bridge Tower Dental, P.A. v. Meridian Computer Center, Inc.

272 P.3d 541 (2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P, a dental practice, hired D to provide a computer hardware system subject to a warranty contract. D bid $14,659.00 to build and assemble a computer system which included several computers, monitors, printers, and a server. The server contained two separate hard drives designed to mirror each other so that if one hard drive failed, the data would remain intact on the mirrored drive. D also provided a Sony DAT tape system to back up P's data. The computer system was sold with a three-year warranty. Under the terms of the service contract, Colson was responsible for 'ensuring that system backups are completed successfully.' Colson was paid 500 dollars a month for providing maintenance support and backup services. In 2004, the DAT tape system was no longer capable of backing up new data because P's data exceeded the tape's capacity. P was informed of options and wanted to purchase a new backup system but did not have the funds available. When the tape exceeded its capacity and began failing, it destroyed the data on the tape over a period of time, leaving the mirrored hard drive as the only backup. In June of 2005, Colson suspected that one of the hard drives was failing, but that the mirrored drive was fully functional. Colson informed P and immediately took the computer, including the server and both hard drives, to D for repair under the warranty. Colson delivered the server to D who agreed to diagnose and replace the failing hard drive pursuant to the warranty. Colson also asked D to perform a backup of the data before doing anything destructive to the hard drives. D denied being requested to perform a backup of the data and further explained that his standard practice is not to backup data because 'it's usually the customer's responsibility.' D attempted to recover the failed hard drive (which destroyed the data) but had to install a new hard drive with no existing data. D intended to copy the data from the functional mirrored drive onto the new drive. D inadvertently mixed up the source drive with the destination drive, consequently erasing all the data on the mirrored hard drive. P was left with no data. All the data containing all of its patients' records and contact information was deleted. P sued D and Colson, alleging breach of contract and negligence. The jury returned a general verdict in favor of D. The court denied P’s motion for JNOV. P appealed.