Our Insights on eDiscovery

Read on to learn more about the latest trends and insights in the world of digital discovery.
Close
Enter your
text here
Production from a Provider’s Point of View: eDiscovery Replay
 Production from a Provider’s Point of View: eDiscovery Replay 648 348 CloudNine

We sometimes forget that the end goal of the discovery process is production: to produce responsive electronically stored information (ESI) to opposing counsel. But, do you realize how many parameters and potential permutations there can be to the production process? Let’s take a look.

read more
Plaintiff Can Review Documents Deemed as Non-Responsive, But Has to Bear its Own Costs: eDiscovery Case Week
 Plaintiff Can Review Documents Deemed as Non-Responsive, But Has to Bear its Own Costs: eDiscovery Case Week 532 353 CloudNine

In Nachurs Alpine Solutions, Corp. v. Banks, Iowa Chief Magistrate Judge C. J. Williams granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff’s motion to compel ESI discovery, by ordering the defendants to produce all of the ESI documents it identified as unresponsive under an Attorneys Eyes Only label and that the plaintiff bear its own costs of reviewing the documents for the categories it believes may hold relevant documents.

read more
Webcast: On Premise or Off Premise? A Look at Security Approaches to eDiscovery (August 30, 2017)
 Webcast: On Premise or Off Premise? A Look at Security Approaches to eDiscovery (August 30, 2017) 150 150 CloudNine

This CLE-approved* webcast session will discuss different on-premise and off-premise eDiscovery solution options and considerations for each.

read more
Court Grants Most of Plaintiff’s Cost Recovery Request, Including All eDiscovery Costs: eDiscovery Case Week
 Court Grants Most of Plaintiff’s Cost Recovery Request, Including All eDiscovery Costs: eDiscovery Case Week 532 353 CloudNine

In Ariel Inv., LLC v. Ariel Capital Advisors LLC, Illinois District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly granted the prevailing plaintiff’s request to tax most requested costs in the amount of $99,378.32, including the entire amount ($85,666.51) requested for reimbursement for eDiscovery costs.

read more
Today’s the Day to Learn How Recent eDiscovery Case Law Has Affected Your Organization: eDiscovery Case Week
 Today’s the Day to Learn How Recent eDiscovery Case Law Has Affected Your Organization: eDiscovery Case Week 532 353 CloudNine

eDiscovery Case Week continues. The best predictor of future behavior is relevant past behavior. Nowhere is that truer than with legal precedents set by past case law decisions, especially when it relates to eDiscovery best practices. Are you aware of recent case law decisions related to eDiscovery best practices and what that those decisions mean to your organization?

read more
Defendant Not Sanctioned Despite Use of Evidence Wiping Software: eDiscovery Case Week
 Defendant Not Sanctioned Despite Use of Evidence Wiping Software: eDiscovery Case Week 532 353 CloudNine

In HCC Ins. Holdings, Inc. v. Flowers, Georgia District Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. denied the plaintiff’s motion for adverse inference sanctions despite evidence that the defendant had used evidence wiping software twice after being ordered to produce her personal computer, stating that the plaintiff “offers only bare speculation that any of its trade secrets or other data were actually transferred” to the defendant’s laptop.

read more
Court Rules that Plaintiff’s Request for Data from Defendant is “Extraordinarily Burdensome”: eDiscovery Case Week
 Court Rules that Plaintiff’s Request for Data from Defendant is “Extraordinarily Burdensome”: eDiscovery Case Week 532 353 CloudNine

In Solo v. United Parcel Services Co., Michigan Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen agreed that the defendant showed that the level of data requested by the plaintiff “would be extraordinarily burdensome” and ordered the parties to discuss the defendant’s proposed methodology and “meet, confer, and agree on a mutually acceptable sampling methodology” if the plaintiff did not agree to the defendant’s approach.

read more
Need an “Assist” with Your eDiscovery Practices? Get an eDiscovery Assistant!: eDiscovery Best Practices
 Need an “Assist” with Your eDiscovery Practices? Get an eDiscovery Assistant!: eDiscovery Best Practices 344 60 CloudNine

As someone who writes a blog daily for (part of) my living, I can attest that it can be a challenge to stay on top of eDiscovery trends and case law. I try to do my best to provide some of that to the readers of this blog and, when it comes to case law, we provide posts on about 60 to 70 cases each year (we’re over 400 unique cases covered lifetime). But, here’s a resource that provides access to even more case law, and several other great resources, as well.

read more
What Can 4,000 Women Do? Help Educate an Industry: eDiscovery Trends
 What Can 4,000 Women Do? Help Educate an Industry: eDiscovery Trends 403 291 CloudNine

If you follow our blog regularly and have been following it over the past few weeks, you know that I’ve been promoting today’s Women in eDiscovery (WiE) event in Houston, the Legal Technology Showcase & Conference, being conducted today at South Texas College of Law (STCL) in downtown Houston. But, I stopped promoting it a couple of days ago. Why?

read more
Court Denies Defendant’s Motion to Overrule Plaintiff’s Objections to Discovery Requests
Cloud Data is Within Defendant’s Possession, Custody and Control, Court Rules: eDiscovery Case Law
 Cloud Data is Within Defendant’s Possession, Custody and Control, Court Rules: eDiscovery Case Law 479 270 CloudNine

In Williams v. Angie’s List, Indiana Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore found that the plaintiffs “have met their burden of demonstrating” that the defendant has a legal right to obtain background data in Salesforce and that “Plaintiffs request for production properly seeks documents within Angie’s List’s ‘possession, custody, or control’ under Rule 34(a).” He also denied the defendant’s request for cost shifting.

read more