Our Insights on eDiscovery

Guide for Making the Most of LegalTech: eDiscovery Trends

January 27, 2015

Believe it or not, LegalTech® New York (LTNY) starts in one week. The show can be overwhelming if you’re not prepared. A couple of weeks ago, Monica Bay wrote a terrific article in Law Technology News (Tips for Newbies to Survive LegalTech New York) which provides suggestions from several show veterans on how to get the most out of the show. That reminded me that Jane Gennarelli wrote a post on this blog three years ago with her own suggestions, so I’ve revisited it below. For best results, check out both articles and make your game plan from there!

California Has an Opinion about Attorney Blogging Too – eDiscovery Trends

January 26, 2015

Last week, we reported on an updated proposed opinion in California that required that attorneys in that state better be sufficiently skilled in eDiscovery, hire technical consultants or competent counsel that is sufficiently skilled, or decline representation in cases where eDiscovery is required (after reporting on the original proposed opinion back in April). Now, the California State Bar Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct (COPRAC) has turned its attention to another relatable topic for me – blogging (by attorneys, of course).

Plaintiff Sanctioned for Late Production, But Not for Failure to Produce Data Held by Outside Vendor: eDiscovery Case Law

January 23, 2015

In Ablan v. Bank of America, Illinois Magistrate Judge Daniel G. Martin recommended that the defendant’s Motion for Sanctions should be granted in part and denied in part, recommending that the plaintiffs be barred from using any new information at summary judgment or at trial that was contained on eight CD-ROMs produced late, but recommending no sanctions for failing to produce or make available documents held by the plaintiff’s outside vendor.

The First 7 to 10 Days May Make or Break Your Case: eDiscovery Best Practices

January 22, 2015

When a case is filed, several activities must be completed within a short period of time (often as soon as the first seven to ten days after filing) to enable you to assess the scope of the case, where the key electronically stored information (ESI) is located and whether to proceed with the case or attempt to settle with opposing counsel. Here are several of the key early activities that can assist in deciding whether to litigate or settle the case.

Payday Loan Company Sanctioned for Discovery Violations: eDiscovery Case Law

January 21, 2015

In James v. National Financial LLC, Delaware Vice Chancellor Laster granted the plaintiff’s motion for sanctions after determining that the defendant’s “discovery misconduct calls for serious measures”. However, the plaintiff’s request for a default judgment was not granted, but lesser sanctions that included attorneys’ fees and a ruling that the lack of information contained in the requested document resulted in an admission.

DESI Wants Your Input! – eDiscovery Trends

January 20, 2015

It’s not Desi Arnaz who wants it, but the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (DESI) VI workshop, which is being held at the University of San Diego on June 8 as part of the 15th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence & Law (ICAIL 2015).

New California eDiscovery Competence Proposed Opinion Has Been Revised – eDiscovery Trends

January 19, 2015

Last April, we reported on a new proposed opinion in California that required that attorneys in that state better be sufficiently skilled in eDiscovery, hire technical consultants or competent counsel that is sufficiently skilled, or decline representation in cases where eDiscovery is required. Now, that opinion has been revised and the comment period has been reset.

Expanded Sources of ESI May Leave You “Fit” to be Tied – eDiscovery Trends

January 16, 2015

One of the items that I bought my wife for Christmas (which she really wanted) was an UP 24™ Fitness Tracker, which is a wristband that tracks a variety of fitness metrics, including steps taken, workouts logged and calories burned (not to mention sleep cycles) and enables you to share and compare your stats with your friends via an app on your mobile device. Another example of a similar device is a Fitbit®. Based on a recent case, these devices are just another example of new devices from which relevant ESI may be collected for discovery.

Court Orders Defendant to Submit Further Declaration after Plaintiff Disputes its Claimed eDiscovery Costs – eDiscovery Case Law

January 15, 2015

In Bonillas v. United Air Lines Inc., California Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. LaPorte ordered the defendant to submit a further declaration supporting its claimed eDiscovery costs by addressing several issues raised by no later than January 5, 2015, with the plaintiff having until January 8, 2015 to submit a brief response to the further declaration if he chose to do so.

Three “C”s, Cowboys, Cannibals and Craig (Ball) – eDiscovery Best Practices

January 14, 2015

They say that a joke is only old if you haven’t heard it before. In that vein, an article about eDiscovery is only old if you haven’t read it before. Craig Ball is currently revisiting some topics that he covered ten years ago with an updated look, making them appropriate for 1) people who weren’t working in eDiscovery ten years ago (which is probably a lot of you), 2) people who haven’t read the articles previously and 3) people who have read the articles previously, but haven’t seen his updated takes. In other words, everybody.