Our Insights on eDiscovery

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.

EDRM Publishes Clarification to its Model Code of Conduct – eDiscovery Trends

January 13, 2015

Yesterday, we discussed an update to the Cooperation Proclamation: Resources for the Judiciary from The Sedona Conference®. Today, another titan of eDiscovery standards and best practices, EDRM, has an update of its own.

Sedona Conference Updates Guide for Judges Again – eDiscovery Trends

January 12, 2015

In 2011, The Sedona Conference® made a public comments version of the Cooperation Proclamation: Resources for the Judiciary available on the Sedona Conference website. As the Preface states, “The Resources are intended to aid State and federal judges in the management of electronically stored information (“ESI”) in civil actions for which the judges are responsible”. In 2012, the Resources guide was updated. Last month, the Resources guide was updated again and the free version is available on the Sedona Conference web site.

Notice Anything Different? – eDiscovery Redesign

January 10, 2015

Besides the fact that this is a rare Saturday post for us? If you’re an email subscriber to eDiscovery Daily, you may have noticed something different in the past few days – a new design for the blog!

2014 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review, Part 4

January 9, 2015

As we noted yesterday, Wednesday and Tuesday, eDiscoveryDaily published 93 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 68 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to privilege and inadvertent disclosures, requests for social media, cases involving technology assisted review and the case of the year – the ubiquitous Apple v. Samsung dispute. Today, let’s take a look back at cases related to sanctions and spoliation.

2014 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review, Part 3

January 8, 2015

As we noted yesterday and the day before, eDiscoveryDaily published 93 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 68 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to eDiscovery cost sharing and reimbursement, fee disputes and production format disputes. Today, let’s take a look back at cases related to privilege and inadvertent disclosures, requests for social media, cases involving technology assisted review and the case of the year – the ubiquitous Apple v. Samsung dispute.

2014 eDiscovery Case Law Year in Review, Part 1

January 6, 2015

It’s time for our annual review of eDiscovery case law! We had more than our share of sanctions granted and denied, as well as disputes over admissibility of electronically stored information (ESI), eDiscovery cost reimbursement, and production formats, even disputes regarding eDiscovery fees. So, as we did last year and the year before that and also the year before that, let’s take a look back at 2014!

Court’s “New and Simpler Approach to Discovery” Identifies Search Terms for Plaintiff to Use – eDiscovery Case Law

January 5, 2015

In Armstrong Pump, Inc. v. Hartman, New York Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott granted in part the defendant’s motion to compel discovery responses and fashioned a “new and simpler approach” to discovery, identifying thirteen search terms/phrases for the plaintiff to use when searching its document collection.

What I Want for Christmas – eDiscovery Wish List

December 19, 2014

With over 1,070 posts since September 20, 2010, we’ve had a lot to say about eDiscovery over 4+ years. However, we’ve never published a Christmas wish list of what we’d like to see happen in eDiscovery over the next year, so I thought I’d offer up some eDiscovery Christmas wishes. Let’s see if any of those come true within the next year!

Image Isn’t Everything, Court Says, Denying Plaintiff’s Request for Imaging on Defendant’s Hard Drives – eDiscovery Case Law

December 16, 2014

In Design Basics, LLC. v. Carhart Lumber Co., Nebraska Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart, after an extensive hearing on the plaintiff’s motion to compel “full disk imaging of Defendant’s hard drives, including Defendant’s POS server, secretaries’ computers, UBS devices. . .”, denied the motion after invoking the mandatory balancing test provided in FRCP Rule 26(b)(2)(C).