If you’re going to be in the Orlando area tomorrow, join me and other legal technology experts and professionals at The Master’s Conference Orlando event. It’s a full day of educational sessions covering a wide range of topics!
read moreAn American Muslim woman filed suit and asked a federal judge to compel border officials to erase data copied from her iPhone. Now, she has settled her lawsuit with the government because federal authorities have now agreed to delete the seized data.
read moreSure, you just voted a couple of days ago, but it’s time to do so again! If you have a favorite eDiscovery blog or a favorite general legal blog, here’s a chance to see it recognized as one of the best. Once again, The Expert Institute is looking for your votes in the 2018 Best Legal Blog Contest.
read moreTechnology Assisted Review (TAR) has been court approved for nearly seven years now and other technologies and approaches have been proven to save time and money while even improving quality within the discovery process. Yet, many lawyers still have yet to embrace these new technologies and approaches. Why, and what needs to happen to change things? Here’s a webcast that will take a look at what needs to happen to help the “Luddite” legal professional learn to embrace technology.
read moreIn Updateme Inc. v. Axel Springer SE, California Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler ordered the defendants to review a random sample of unreviewed documents in dispute and produce any responsive documents reviewed (along with a privilege log, if applicable) and report on the number of documents and families reviewed and the rate of responsiveness within one week.
read moreRemember the Microsoft Office 365 eDiscovery Challenge Survey that Tom O’Connor and Don Swanson were conducting? The results are in!
read moreIn Metlife Inv’rs. USA Ins. Co. v. Lindsey, Indiana Magistrate Judge John E. Martin granted the motion of the defendants/counter plaintiffs (defendants) to compel the plaintiff/counter-defendant (plaintiff) to produce all responsive documents in the form in which they are maintained in the usual course of business (i.e., native files with metadata) and also ordered the defendants to file an itemization of costs and fees, including attorney’s fees, incurred in making the Motion to Compel.
read moreThe Complex Discovery eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey is in the last quarter of its third year and the results are in for the Fall 2018 eDiscovery Business Confidence Survey! As […]
read moreTechnology Assisted Review (TAR) has been court approved for nearly seven years now yet, many lawyers still have yet to embrace these new technologies and approaches. Why, and what needs to happen to change things?.
read moreAs indicated by our friend “Jack”, today is Halloween! This is our ninth(!) year to identify stories to try to “scare” you with tales of eDiscovery and cybersecurity horrors because we are, after all, an eDiscovery blog. Let’s see how we do this year. Michael Myers ain’t got nothing on us!
read more