As was the case in Mailhoit v. Home Depot previously, Magistrate Judge Mark R. Abel ruled in Howell v. The Buckeye Ranch that the defendant’s request (to compel the plaintiff to provide her user names and passwords for each of the social media sites she uses) was overbroad.
read moreToday is Halloween. While we could try to “scare” you with the traditional “frights”, we’re an eDiscovery blog, so every year we try to “scare” you in a different way instead. Does this scare you?
read moreWe spend a lot of time discussing and referencing the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, especially the changes adopted in 2006 to address handling of electronically stored information (ESI). But, not all cases are Federal jurisdiction cases. Many are state cases and each state (well, most of them anyway) have their own rules regarding eDiscovery. One of those states is Tennessee. Now, for those who practice law in Tennessee and need to address eDiscovery issues, there is a new book available to provide guidance in addressing those issues. Electronic Discovery in Tennessee: Rules, Case Law and Distinctions was written by W. Russell Taber III. I recently interviewed Russell regarding the book and asked him several questions about the book and about eDiscovery in Tennessee in general.
read moreAs reported in Ralph Losey’s e-Discovery Team® blog, Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster in Delaware Chancery Court – in EORHB, Inc., et al v. HOA Holdings, LLC, – has issued a “surprise” bench order requiring both sides to use predictive coding and to use the same vendor.
read moreI found this nice summary of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and other sources that address proportionality and cooperation in eDiscovery from the Baker Hostetler blog, Discovery Advocate, written by Gil Keteltas entitled Advocating Proportionality? Start with the Rules! Here are the highlights.
read moreLast week, the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) conducted its mid-year meeting to enable the working groups to meet and further accomplishments in each of the teams for the year. Having attended several of these meetings in the past, I’ve always found them to usually yield significant progress within the working groups, as well as providing a great opportunity for eDiscovery professionals to get together and talk shop. Based on the results of the meeting, EDRM issued an announcement with updates from several of their more active projects.
read moreIn Botell v. United States, Magistrate Judge Gregory Hollows noted that the US Government’s “document production performance in these proceedings has been akin to a drop-by-drop water torture” and ordered a preclusion order prohibiting the US Government “from presenting evidence in its case that had been requested by plaintiffs in the Requests for Production, but which has not been produced” as of the date of the order. The US was also still required to produce the documents, whether they planned to use them or not. Judge Hollows also noted that the “Plaintiff has not waived any motion to seek further sanctions regarding non-production of documents, or spoliation of documents.”
read moreLast week, we discussed the benefits of requesting document productions in native format, including the ability to use Early Data Assessment/FirstPass Review applications to analyze your opponents produced data and metadata, using capabilities like email analytics and message thread analysis (where missing emails in threads can be identified), synonym searching, fuzzy searching and domain categorization. If you don’t understand the benefits of receiving the underlying metadata, try reviewing an image of an Excel spreadsheet and see if you can understand how the numbers were calculated without the underlying formulas. Not so easy, is it? However, one objection that attorneys provide against producing documents in native format is that they’re not conducive to Bates labeling.
read moreOn the surface, it may seem easy enough to redact a document during eDiscovery review to obscure confidential or privileged information. All you need to do is draw a black box over the affected text, right? Not so fast, my friend. There’s a lot more to consider in order to ensure that you don’t inadvertently produce information that was intended to be redacted. Here are a few redaction “epic fails” and how to avoid them.
read moreIn Matter of Tilimbo, a court held it was permissible to order cloning of computer files where doing so did not place an unreasonable burden on a nonparty, appropriate steps were taken to protect any privileged information, and the nonparty had not previously produced the requested information in hard copy.
read more