In American Home Assurance Co. v. Greater Omaha Packing Co., Nebraska District Judge Lyle E. Strom ruled (among other things) that the defendants must disclose the sources it has searched (or intends to search) for electronically stored information (ESI) to the plaintiffs and, for each source, identify the search terms used.
read moreIn Logtale, Ltd. v. IKOR, Inc., California Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu granted the plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to discovery and awarded partial attorney’s fees as a result of defendants’ conduct. The judge did not grant the plaintiff’s request to order Defendants to retain an eDiscovery vendor to conduct a thorough and adequate search for responsive electronic documents, but did note that the court would do so “if there are continuing problems with their document productions”.
read moreThere are several decisions that the lead attorney has to make when a new case is filed. Decisions made early in the life cycle of a case can significantly affect how discovery is managed and how costly the discovery process can be for that case. Decision trees are a mechanism that can help attorneys plan for discovery by enabling them to make decisions up front that can lead to more efficient management of the discovery process.
read moreYesterday, we gave you a pop quiz for the topics we’ve covered in the past month. If you’re reading the blog each day, these questions should be easy! Let’s see how you did. Here are the answers.
read moreDid you think we forgot to quiz you about last month’s topics? Perish the thought! Like we did in July, here is a pop quiz for the topics we covered in August. If you’re reading the blog each day, these questions should be easy! If not, we’ve provided a link to the post with the answer. We’re that nice. Test your knowledge! Tomorrow, we’ll post the answers for those who don’t know and didn’t look them up.
read moreOne of the most influential organizations in eDiscovery is The Sedona Conference® (TSC), and some of TSC’s most recent contributions have been documented in this blog, including a commentary on proportionality (released in 2010), database principles (2011) and guidance for judges (2012). Last month, TSC’s Working Group on Electronic Document Retention & Production (WG1) released it’s Second Edition of The Sedona Conference® Commentary on Ethics & Metadata.
read moreUnderstanding the relationships of your organization’s internal and external challenges allows your organization to approach ongoing and future discovery in a more strategic process. A “SWOT” analysis is a tool that can be used to develop that understanding.
read moreYou’ve got an employee suing her ex-employer for discrimination, hostile work environment and being forced to resign. During discovery, it was determined that a key email was deleted due to the employer’s routine auto-delete policy, so the plaintiff filed a motion for sanctions. Sound familiar? Yep. Was her motion granted? Nope.
read moreRalph Losey describes a unique case this week in his e-Discovery Team ® blog (Poor Plaintiff’s Counsel, Can’t Even Find a CAR, Much Less Drive One). In Northstar Marine, Inc. v. Huffman, the defendant’s motion to enforce the parties’ document production agreement was granted after Alabama Magistrate Judge William E. Cassady rejected the plaintiff’s excuse that “it is having difficulty locating an inexpensive provider of electronic search technology to assist with discovery”.
read moreWe’ve discussed previously that electronic files aren’t necessarily ready to review just because they’re electronic. They often need processing and good processing requires a sound process. Sometimes that process includes data conversion if the data isn’t in the most useful format.
read more|
On-Premise Processing and Review offer unique advantages that the cloud alone can’t replicate. Make an informed decision. |
