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
Court Denies Defendant’s Motion to Overrule Plaintiff’s Objections to Discovery Requests
Court Tells Litigants “NO MORE WARNINGS” When It Comes to Boilerplate Discovery Objections: eDiscovery Case Law
 Court Tells Litigants “NO MORE WARNINGS” When It Comes to Boilerplate Discovery Objections: eDiscovery Case Law 479 270 CloudNine

In Liguria Foods, Inc. v. Griffith Laboratories, Inc., Iowa District Judge Mark W. Bennett declined to sanction the parties for issuing boilerplate objections, but strongly warned them that the use of boilerplate objections in the future would place counsel and their clients at risk for significant sanctions.

read more
Today’s the Day to Find Out What Every Attorney Should Know About eDiscovery in 2017: eDiscovery Trends
 Today’s the Day to Find Out What Every Attorney Should Know About eDiscovery in 2017: eDiscovery Trends 300 300 CloudNine

If you’ve missed earlier opportunities to find out what every attorney should know about eDiscovery in 2017, you get another opportunity today, thanks to our friends at ACEDS! Join us today at noon CT (1pm ET, 10am PT)!

read more
Court Denies Defendant’s Motion to Overrule Plaintiff’s Objections to Discovery Requests
After Metadata Shows Agreement Documents to Be Unreliable, Defendant’s “Hans” are Tied: eDiscovery Case Law
 After Metadata Shows Agreement Documents to Be Unreliable, Defendant’s “Hans” are Tied: eDiscovery Case Law 479 270 CloudNine

In Ensing v. Ensing, et. al., Vice Chancellor Slights ruled for the plaintiff in the case and concluding that the defendant “has engaged in blatant violations of court orders and bad faith litigation conduct that justify serious sanctions”, ordering him to pay two-thirds of the plaintiff’s counsel’s fees and expenses and all of the plaintiff’s computer forensic expert’s fees and expenses.

read more
“Master” Your Knowledge of eDiscovery With This Conference in San Francisco Later This Month: eDiscovery Trends
 “Master” Your Knowledge of eDiscovery With This Conference in San Francisco Later This Month: eDiscovery Trends 383 322 CloudNine

I’m delighted to be participating in The Master’s Conference series again this year. If you’re in the San Francisco area or plan to be there on April 25, join me and other legal technology experts and professionals at The Master’s Conference event for a full day of educational sessions covering a wide range of topics!

read more
Should Failing to Issue a Litigation Hold Be Considered Intent to Deprive?: eDiscovery Best Practices
 Should Failing to Issue a Litigation Hold Be Considered Intent to Deprive?: eDiscovery Best Practices 257 326 CloudNine

A lot has been discussed about the most recent changes to the Federal Rules, especially with regard to Rule 37(e) and the requirement of the intent to deprive standard to apply more serious sanctions. But, what activities constitute intent to deprive? Should failing to issue a litigation hold be considered intent to deprive a party of potentially responsive ESI when that ESI is not preserved?

read more
The Last Word on LegalTech New York 2017: eDiscovery Trends
 The Last Word on LegalTech New York 2017: eDiscovery Trends 508 344 CloudNine

Since this blog was founded in 2010, we have certainly covered each LegalTech New York (LTNY) conference extensively, with (in most years) a pre-show look, coverage of eDiscovery related sessions each day, a post mortem set of observations from LTNY attendees and an annual thought leader interview series (this year was our seventh annual series). But, nobody covers the show quite like Andrew Haslam.

read more
What Can Go Wrong, Will Go Wrong. Here’s What to Do About It: eDiscovery Trends
 What Can Go Wrong, Will Go Wrong. Here’s What to Do About It: eDiscovery Trends 370 211 CloudNine

If you’ve ever managed a discovery project for litigation, investigations or audits, you know that “Murphy’s Law” dictates that a number of “pitfalls” and “potholes” can (and will) occur that can derail your project. These issues can add considerable cost to your discovery effort through unexpected rework and also cause you to miss important deadlines or even incur the wrath of a judge for not following accepted rules and principles for discovery. Here’s a new webinar that will help you avoid many of these “pitfalls” and “potholes”.

read more
What’s Changed and What’s Next for EDRM at Duke: eDiscovery Trends
 What’s Changed and What’s Next for EDRM at Duke: eDiscovery Trends 189 111 CloudNine

As we’ve discussed, EDRM was recently acquired by Duke Law School’s Center for Judicial Studies. How will this new partnership change EDRM? Yesterday, EDRM and Duke Law conducted a webinar to discuss the future of EDRM at Duke, what’s changed and what’s next.

read more
Failing to Test Search Terms Before Agreeing to Them Can Be Costly: eDiscovery Best Practices
 Failing to Test Search Terms Before Agreeing to Them Can Be Costly: eDiscovery Best Practices 340 342 CloudNine

As soon as litigation is anticipated, it’s a good idea to begin collecting potentially responsive data and assessing it by performing searches and testing the results. Because, if you wait until after the meet and confer with opposing counsel to do so, it can be expensive.

read more
Court Denies Untimely Motion to Compel Production of Text Messages: eDiscovery Case Law
 Court Denies Untimely Motion to Compel Production of Text Messages: eDiscovery Case Law 340 341 CloudNine

In Healthwerks, Inc. et. al. v. Stryker Spine, et. al., Wisconsin District Judge Pamela Pepper denied a motion to compel production of text messages issued by the plaintiffs and third party defendants against the defendant Stryker, agreeing with Stryker that filing the motion almost six months after discovery had closed was untimely.

read more