In Shamrock-Shamrock, Inc. v. Remark, the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District affirmed the summary final judgment in favor of the Appellee, holding that Florida law does not impose a duty on nonparties to litigation to preserve evidence based solely on the foreseeability of litigation.
read moreYep, it’s that time of year again. Time for Andrew Haslam’s annual eDisclosure Systems Buyers Guide!
read moreIn Thomas on Behalf of Estate of Thomas v. Bannum Place, Inc., Michigan Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti granted and denied the plaintiff’s motion to compel in part, ruling that all of the defendant’s objections to the plaintiff’s discovery requests “are WAIVED…because of its failure to timely respond and object to either set of Plaintiff’s discovery requests.” Judge Patti also granted “reasonable expenses” to the plaintiff in bringing her motion to compel.
read moreTwo days, two posts about eDiscovery education and best practices at law schools! Yes, it’s time for the annual Duke/EDRM Workshop in Durham, NC, later this month. And, you don’t have to be a member of Duke/EDRM to attend!
read moreThere are training courses and there are training courses, but there is no more in-depth eDiscovery training course than the Georgetown Law Center eDiscovery Training Academy. Once again, it is coming up in just over a month. And, if you hurry, you can save on registration!
read moreIn Siemers v. BNSF Railway Co., Nebraska Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis finding that the plaintiff’s telephone records are discoverable pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, that they are not subject to a privilege claim just because plaintiff’s counsel’s telephone number may appear in the records and that privacy issues are minimal to non-existent (since the at-issue records do not contain the substance of communications), ordered the plaintiff to produce his telephone records within one week of the order.
read moreLast week, I discussed two public comment publications from The Sedona Conference® (TSC) from last year that were published in final form over the past few weeks. Now, TSC has announced a new publication from and its Working Group 11 on Data Security and Privacy Liability (WG11) that evaluates the application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product protection doctrine to an organization’s cybersecurity information.
read moreAs promised yesterday, I’m here to cover the results of the Spring 2019 eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey, published (as always) on Rob Robinson’s terrific Complex Discovery site. So, how confident are individuals working in the eDiscovery ecosystem in the business of eDiscovery? Let’s see.
read moreSome weeks there is so much to cover in eDiscovery that it’s difficult to get to everything. This is one of those weeks. Like me, several of you are fans of Rob Robinson’s quarterly eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey on his Complex Discovery blog and he has just published the results of his Spring 2019 Survey, which are very interesting and I will (hopefully) post my normal analysis on that tomorrow. But, Craig Ball has posted – not just one, but two – interesting posts on his Ball in Your Court blog this week that definitely need to be covered as well. “Ball” comes before “Robinson” alphabetically, so I’ll cover his posts first. ;o)
read moreLast year, The Sedona Conference® (TSC) published a bunch of…er…publications. That included the Public Comment Version of their Primer on Social Media, Second Edition, the Public Comment version of its Commentary on BYOD: Principles and Guidance for Developing Policies and Meeting Discovery Obligations and the final version of its new Data Privacy Primer. Now, TSC has published the final versions of two other guides for which it published the public comment version last year.
read more|
On-Premise Processing and Review offer unique advantages that the cloud alone can’t replicate. Make an informed decision. |
