In Tener v. Cremer, 89 AD3d 75 [2011], the Appellate Division, First Department, explained the legal principles involved when such information is at issue: "In this day and age the discovery of ESI is commonplace. Although the CPLR is silent on the topic, the Uniform Rules of the Trial Courts, several courts, as well as bar associations, have addressed the discovery of ESI and have provided working guidelines that are useful to judges and practitioners. Indeed, in 2006, the Conference of Chief Justices approved a report entitled Guidelines for State Trial Courts Regarding Discovery of Electronically Stored Information'. New York's Uniform Rules for the Trial Courts specifically contemplate discovery of ESI. Rule 202.12(c)(3) allows a court, where appropriate, to establish the method and scope of electronic discovery (Uniform Rules for Trial Cts [22 NYCRR] 202.12[c] [3]). The Uniform Rules addressing the discovery of ESI are fairly recent. They took effect in 2009. However, the Rules of the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court have addressed discovery of ESI for some time. Rule 8(b) of the rules contains requirements similar to those in the Uniform Rules (22 NYCRR 202.70[g]). The Commercial Division for Supreme Court, Nassau County has built on Commercial Division rule 8(b) to develop the most sophisticated rules concerning discovery of ESI in the State of New York. That court also publishes in-depth guidelines for the discovery of ESI (the Nassau Guidelines). While aimed at parties, the Nassau Guidelines are appropriate in cases, such as this, where a nonparty's data is at issue" . The Tener Court also pointed out that "ESI is difficult to destroy permanently. Deletion usually only makes the data more difficult to access. Accordingly, discovery rules contemplate data recovery" (id., at 79).