Close
Enter your
text here

Industry Trends

“Master” Your Knowledge of eDiscovery With This Conference in San Francisco Later This Month: eDiscovery Trends

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!

The Master’s Conference brings together leading experts and professionals from law firms, corporations and the bench to develop strategies, practices and resources for managing the information life cycle.  This year’s San Francisco event covers topics ranging from technology evaluations to forces changing eDiscovery to mobile device and social media discovery.  Cybersecurity and data science are covered too.

The event will be held at Bently Reserve, 301 Battery St, San Francisco, CA 94111.  Registration begins at 8am, with sessions starting right after that, at 8:30am.

CloudNine will be sponsoring the session Data, Discovery, and Decisions: Extending Discovery From Collection To Creation at 1:45pm.  I will be moderating a panel that includes Gordon J. Calhoun, Partner with Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, Jamie Raba, Attorney with Seyfarth Shaw LLP and Julia Romero Peter, General Counsel and Vice President of Sales with CloudNine.

Our panel discussion will discuss how big data is impacting today’s litigation landscape, the use of non-traditional tools and approaches and how more and more organizations are conducting “data discovery” pre-litigation.  It should be a very informative discussion with a very knowledgeable panel!  Hope you can join us!

Click here to register for the conference.  If you’re a non-vendor, the cost is only $175 to attend for the full day (that cost goes up to $300 after next Tuesday, April 18).

This year, The Master’s Conference also has events scheduled for Chicago, Denver, New York City, London(!), Washington DC and Orlando.  Click here for more information on remaining scheduled events for the year.

So, what do you think?  Are you going to be in San Francisco on April 25?  If so, come join us!  And, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

The Last Word on LegalTech New York 2017: eDiscovery Trends

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.

Andrew’s annual write-up on LTNY is as comprehensive a look at the show as you’ll find.  This year, his write-up (cheekily titled Do you want AI with that?) is a ten page overview that covers everything from the theme of the show in his observation (which is reflected in the title of the write-up) to weather and travel (for Andrew, that is across the pond from Britain) to the venue to a host of (sometimes brutally frank) observations from participants (including yours truly) and Andrew’s own observations from meetings with various vendors at the show (including CloudNine).  The title comes from his observation that “as in the fast food industry where ‘do you want fries with that?’ became a standard upsell to any order, so AI seems to be tacked on to every presentation (and a lot of demonstrations) at the event.”

Andrew’s report was a little later than usual this year as he now has a different “day job” as the UK eDisclosure Project Manager at Squire Patton Boggs and he notes that the opinions are his own and not those of his employer.  I can relate as every post I write has that disclaimer paragraph at the bottom that you see.  Regardless, Andrew’s LTNY write-up is always uniquely informative and entertaining and a great read.

A link to Andrew’s report can be found at Legal IT Insider here.

So, what do you think?  Did you attend LTNY this year?  If so, what did YOU think of the event?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

What’s Changed and What’s Next for EDRM at Duke: eDiscovery Trends

As we’ve discussed (here, here and here), 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.

The webinar was conducted by George Socha, co-founder of EDRM (and now managing director in BDO’s Forensic Technology Services practice) and Jim Waldron, the new EDRM Director.  Jim isn’t just new to EDRM, he’s new to Duke, having started February 1st after more than 30 years as Clerk of the US Bankruptcy Court in New Jersey and having served on the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules since 2010.

Duke Law School’s Center for Judicial Studies is designed to bring together the bench, bar, academy, and other professionals to facilitate educational opportunities and develop practical resources, guides and other materials.  In addition to EDRM, it includes The Duke Conference and Judicature, a quarterly journal publication for judges.

As for EDRM, some of the things that have changed as a result of the Duke acquisition include:

  • New relationship with academy and judiciary that broadens EDRM’s reach and opportunities for collaboration;
  • New audiences for EDRM materials;
  • New team to support EDRM activities (as George noted, with Duke’s support, EDRM no longer has to be the “George and Tom show”);
  • New focus with one major project per year to ensure deliverables;
  • The opportunity to collaborate with The Duke Conference, which will start with the TAR project (this year’s major project) in September; and
  • The opportunity to publish in Judicature.

Speaking of the TAR project, it’s already underway with three teams led by Mike Quartararo, of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP; Gareth Evans, of Gibson Dunn; and Adam Strayer, of BDO Consulting.  Those teams will meet at the EDRM annual workshop from May 15 to 17 in Durham.  Email edrm@law.duke.edu if you’re interested in joining the project (to join, you have to be an EDRM member, click here for more information on how to join EDRM).

EDRM is also in the early stages of a project related to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the impacts of it on cross border discovery and there will be a breakout session on that during the annual workshop as well.

Not everything has changed at EDRM.  It will still be a member-driven organization, efforts on past projects will continue, and all of the models, publications and other materials that were available to the public will continue to be available.

EDRM will also be conducting a webinar, tentatively scheduled for later this month, on the new Security Audit Questionnaire rolled out last month.  Sounds like business as usual at EDRM with plenty of activities happening post acquisition.

So, what do you think?  Will the acquisition by Duke Law be a positive influence for EDRM?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Today is The Day to Find Out about Current Trends in eDiscovery: eDiscovery Trends

If you don’t write a daily blog like I do and don’t have a lot of time to keep up with current eDiscovery trends otherwise, you can attend our webcast today for a recap of recent key eDiscovery trends and case law to stay current with today’s trends in eDiscovery, information governance and cybersecurity.

Today at noon CST (1:00pm EST, 10:00am PST), CloudNine will conduct the webcast Key eDiscovery Trends and Case Law for 2017.  This one hour webcast will cover key events, trends, and developments that occurred over the course of last year (or so) and how they impact those in the eDiscovery community.  Examples of trends being covered include:

  • Evolution of eDiscovery Technology
  • Privacy Trends in the US and Internationally
  • Key Trends in Cybersecurity and Data Breaches
  • Continued Evolution of Artificial Intelligence in the Legal Space
  • What Happens Every Minute on the Internet
  • Proliferation of Rules Regarding Attorney Technical Competence
  • Important Cases in Technology Assisted Review
  • Key 2015 Federal Rules Changes and How They Impacted Case Law

I’ll be presenting the webcast with Julia Romero Peter, Esq., General Counsel and VP of Sales at CloudNine and we will condense over a year’s worth of key stories and trends down to a one hour presentation.  When I conducted this presentation recently at the February meeting of Houston Association of Litigation Support Managers, it was called “insightful and thought provoking”.

To register for the webcast, click here.  I write a daily blog and keep abreast of current eDiscovery trends to make it easier for you to keep up with those same trends – now, here’s an opportunity to do so in an hour.  Hope you can attend!

So, what do you think?  Are you up to date in the latest trends in eDiscovery?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

For the Fifth Year, Florida is the Place to Be for eDiscovery Education: eDiscovery Trends

The fifth annual University of Florida E-Discovery Conference is coming up one week from today, on March 30, and you can attend even if you don’t plan to be in the state of Florida on that day.

Not surprisingly, given the new technology CLE requirement in Florida, the focus of the conference this year is competence in 2017.  As the conference site notes, it’s “no longer your grandfather’s e-discovery (circa 2005). There are exciting new e-discovery tools, new offerings and huge new challenges against a backdrop of increasing demands for competence by judicial officials.”

Notable speakers include Craig Ball, George Socha of BDO Consulting, David Horrigan of kCura, Ralph Losey of Jackson Lewis, Mary Mack of ACEDS, Kenya Dixon of the FTC, Corey Lee of Hunton & Williams and Sonya Strnad from Holland & Knight.  Not to mention a number of federal and state judges, including U.S. Magistrates William Matthewman, Anthony Porcelli, and Gary Jones, Florida Circuit Court Judge Meenu Sasser, and retired Florida Circuit Court Judge Ralph Artigliere.

The conference includes topics ranging from cloud/social media/mobile devices preservation to collections on a budget to meet and confer to defending your keyword search.  The use of artificial intelligence for document review is explored, as well as efficient and reliable document review using contemporary tools.  The day ends with a judicial panel where federal and state judges discuss what they now expect from clients and attorneys.  A link to the Agenda is here.

For the first time, the University of Florida Levin College of Law is also sponsoring an E-Discovery CareerFest to respond to the growing interest of University of Florida law students in exploring career paths that involve electronic discovery and data analytic skills.  The CareerFest will be conducted the day before the main conference, Wednesday, March 29, from 3:00 to 5:30PM ET.

The 2017 UF Law E-Discovery Conference has been approved for 6 General, 6 Technology and 1 Ethics CLE credits by the Florida Bar.  If you plan to attend in person, the event will once again take place at the University of Florida Levin College of Law campus.  But, if you can’t attend in person, the event will also (once again) be streamed online.

The conference costs $199 to attend in person or $99 to attend via livestream.  Members of the 8th Judicial Circuit Bar Association, ACEDS and Friends of the conference are eligible to receive a discounted rate.  The conference is free to attend in person or via livestream to all employees of federal and state government agencies, judges and judicial staff, students, and academics.  To register for the conference, click on the “Register Now” link on the conference web site here.

So, what do you think?  Are you attending the conference?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

78 is Great! eDiscovery Daily Is Seventy Eight! (Months Old, That Is)

A new record!  (Get it?)  Seventy eight months ago today (a.k.a., 6 1/2 years), eDiscovery Daily was launched.  It’s hard to believe that it has been 6 1/2 years since our first three posts debuted on our first day, September 20, 2010.  Now, we’re up to 1,656 lifetime posts, and so much has happened in the industry that we’ve covered.

Twice a year, we like to take a look back at some of the important stories and topics during that time.  So, here are just a few of the posts over the last six months you may have missed.  Enjoy!

Thanks, once again, for your support!  Our subscriber base and daily views continue to grow, and we owe it all to you!  Thanks for the interest you’ve shown in the topics!  We will do our best to continue to provide interesting and useful eDiscovery news and analysis.  And, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Lack of Comma Means That Breaking Up Overtime Pay is Hard to Do: Litigation Trends

Do do do

Down dooby doo down down

Comma, comma, down dooby doo down down

Comma, comma, down dooby doo down down

Breaking up is hard to do

Not since Neil Sadaka’s classic song has a “comma” meant so much.  A class-action lawsuit about overtime pay for truck drivers has come down to punctuation and the lack of an Oxford comma has resulted in an appeals court reversal of a partial summary judgment by a lower court.

As reported by Newser (Dairy Drivers in Maine Are Celebrating a Missing Comma, written by Jenn Gidman), dairy drivers in Maine won an appeal because of a missing Oxford comma. In the suit over overtime pay against Oakhurst Dairy, first filed in 2014, drivers complained that a list of tasks not eligible for overtime did not make it clear whether “distribution” counted, mainly because of the lack of the Oxford comma.

FWIW, an Oxford comma is defined as a comma used after the penultimate item in a list of three or more items, before ‘and’ or ‘or’ (e.g. Michelangelo was an Italian painter, sculptor, and architect).  Some believe it should be used and others don’t, so the usage of it varies.

In this case, three truck drivers sued Oakhurst Dairy in 2014, seeking more than four years’ worth of back overtime pay that they had not been paid. Maine law requires workers to be paid 1.5 times their normal rate for each hour worked after 40 hours, but it also identifies certain exemptions, as noted in Maine state law, which says (in Exemption F) that overtime rules do not apply to:

The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of:

(1) Agricultural produce;

(2) Meat and fish products; and

(3) Perishable foods.

So, does that mean overtime rules don’t apply to packing for shipment and they also don’t apply to distribution?  Or does it mean that overtime rules don’t apply to packing, for shipment or distribution?

The district court ruled the former, which interpreted the law as excluding those involved in distribution (e.g., truck drivers) from overtime pay.  The drivers appealed, and in a 29-page court decision handed down on Monday, the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s grant of partial summary judgment to the defendant.  Referring to the language as “ambiguous”, the Court stated:

“Given that the delivery drivers contend that they engage in neither packing for shipment nor packing for distribution, the District Court erred in granting Oakhurst summary judgment as to the meaning of Exemption F. If the drivers engage only in distribution and not in any of the standalone activities that Exemption F covers – a contention about which the Magistrate Judge recognized possible ambiguity – the drivers fall outside of Exemption F’s scope and thus within the protection of the Maine overtime law.”

The amount at stake could be as much as $10 million.  Thanks to the absence of an Oxford comma, those truck drivers may yet recoup that amount.

So, what do you think?   Can you think of any other cases that may have turned on punctuation?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Happy St. Patrick’s Day!!

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

The Impact of Cybersecurity Concerns on M&A Activities is Growing: eDiscovery Trends

This is the second story that I’ve covered in the past several months where cybersecurity concerns impacted merger and acquisitions.  See below for more on the first one…

After Verizon Communications took a $350 million discount on its purchase of Yahoo based on the massive data breaches disclosed by the Internet company last year, it may be time for cybersecurity and data privacy lawyers to take a more active role in merger and acquisition discussions.

In Bloomberg Law (Are Cyber Lawyers Poised to Play Bigger Role in M&A?, written by Rebecca Beyer), the author notes that, in two attacks in 2013 and 2014, more than a billion Yahoo users’ personal account info was hacked.  Yes, that’s billion with a “b”.

The resulting acquisition of Yahoo by Verizon, negotiated over several months, may be the first time a merger price has been discounted because of a data breach, said Craig A. Newman, a global cybersecurity partner at Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler in New York.  Yahoo tapped Hunton & Williams to handle the cyber issues in its amended agreement with Verizon, according to a company representative. The firm’s privacy and cybersecurity practice is led by Lisa J. Sotto, a noted expert who chairs the Department of Homeland Security’s Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee.

Sotto was quoted in the article observing: “Privacy and data security really had for years been on the back burner in M&A transactions…It’s only in the last few years that privacy and cyber security lawyers have been brought into the due diligence and document negotiation process.”

After Yahoo announced the hacks of its users’ data, many people asked whether Verizon would try to back out of the deal — or if it would be able to.

But walking away from a merger agreement is almost impossible, according to Steven Davidoff Solomon, a professor at UC Berkeley School of Law. To exit a deal, a company would need to prove that a data breach counts as a material adverse event or change as defined by so-called MAC clauses in merger agreements, he said.

Proving a material adverse event often requires battling in court over questions like whether an incident was “significant” and “durational,” said Solomon, who has written in the past that about the Yahoo/Verizon deal. He noted that it’s not at all clear whether data breaches — even of the size disclosed by Yahoo — would rise to that level.

As a result, buyers are asking their counsel to look long and hard at targets’ IT departments so they can at least be informed in advance about potential problems. According to a survey by West Monroe Partners, 80 percent of respondents said cybersecurity due diligence was highly important in reaching a deal (and 77 percent said that issue had “increased significantly” in importance in the past two years).

So, it may be a good idea to get your cyber lawyers involved in the early stages of M&A discussions.  And, make sure you’re on the same page when talking about mergers and acquisitions.  :o)

The first post I mentioned at the top of this post related to this merger of law firms where the lead attorney of one firm decided to merge with a larger law firm, at least in part over her concerns about cybersecurity.  Concerns about cybersecurity are not only impacting mergers, they are also causing them, at least in some instances.

So, what do you think?   Do concerns about cybersecurity and data privacy play a role in M&A discussions at your organization?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

Lawyer’s Pants Literally Catch on Fire and Alexa to “Testify”: eDiscovery Trends

OK, this first story isn’t exactly an eDiscovery story, but it’s too good to pass up…

Here’s a question for you: Would you believe what a lawyer was telling you during closing arguments if his pants were, literally, on fire?

According to this story from the Miami Herald, this actually happened on Wednesday as Miami defense lawyer Stephen Gutierrez began his closing arguments in front of a jury — in an arson case.

Gutierrez, who was arguing that his client’s car spontaneously combusted and was not intentionally set on fire (hmmm…), had been fiddling in his pocket as he was about to address jurors when smoke began billowing out his right pocket, witnesses told the Miami Herald.

Gutierrez rushed out of the Miami courtroom, leaving spectators stunned. After jurors were ushered out, Gutierrez returned unharmed, with a singed pocket, and insisted it wasn’t a staged defense demonstration gone wrong, instead blaming a faulty battery in an e-cigarette, observers said.

Miami-Dade police and prosecutors are now investigating the episode. Officers seized several frayed e-cigarette batteries as evidence.  Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Michael Hanzman, in the coming days, could decide to hold Gutierrez in contempt of court.

Despite his own demonstration of spontaneous combustion, Gutierrez’s client, Claudy Charles, was convicted of second-degree arson.

Now, on to the eDiscovery story…

Those who remember last year’s battle between Apple and the Justice Department over the Judge’s order for Apple to give investigators access to encrypted data on the iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters may also remember that the Justice Department asked the court to vacate its order requiring Apple to assist when an unnamed third party was able to access the iPhone.  Here’s another battle that was shaping up over access to data on a device that has ended shortly after it began.

According to Legaltech News (Amazon, Avoiding First Amendment Clash, Drops Objections to Echo Warrant, written by Ben Hancock), Amazon Inc. has agreed to hand over recordings from an “Echo” device that was in the home of a murder suspect in Arkansas, after initially resisting doing so on First Amendment grounds.

In a stipulation filed Monday in the Circuit Court of Benton County, Arkansas, Amazon’s attorneys at Davis Wright Tremaine wrote that defendant James Bates had consented to the production of the recordings from his Echo, and that its motion to quash a warrant seeking the data was now moot.

A hearing on the motion had been set for Wednesday. Bates’s attorney, Kathleen Zellner (most notable for her work in wrongful conviction advocacy and current representation of Steven Avery), said in a tweet Tuesday morning: “We agreed to release recordings-my client James Bates is innocent.”

Amazon’s fight against the warrant seeking data from Bates’ Echo had been closely watched by legal experts as a test of the limits of privacy protections for data gathered by connected devices in consumers’ homes. I guess we’ll have to save that first battle over privacy rights by Echo owners for another case.

Having an Echo in our home and hearing Alexa often say “I didn’t get that” when we’re in normal conversation and not making an Echo request, I can only imagine how much data there is, or how long it’s retained.  Cases like these will continue to illustrate the amount of ESI that IoT devices may hold.

So, what do you think?  Should individuals have privacy rights to the data on their IoT devices, like the Amazon Echo?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

What are the Current Trends in eDiscovery? Catch this Webinar to Find Out: eDiscovery Trends

A lot is happening in eDiscovery these days and it’s harder than ever to keep up.  I have no choice to keep up with current eDiscovery trends – I write a daily blog, so I have to continue to find new topics to write about.  Thankfully, you don’t have to do that – you can attend a one hour webcast later this month for a recap of recent key eDiscovery trends and case law to stay current with today’s trends in eDiscovery, information governance and cybersecurity.

On March 30 at noon CST (1:00pm EST, 10:00am PST), CloudNine will conduct the webcast Key eDiscovery Trends and Case Law for 2017.  This one hour webcast will cover key events, trends, and developments that occurred over the course of last year (or so) and how they impact those in the eDiscovery community.  Examples of trends being covered include:

  • Evolution of eDiscovery Technology
  • Privacy Trends in the US and Internationally
  • Key Trends in Cybersecurity and Data Breaches
  • Continued Evolution of Artificial Intelligence in the Legal Space
  • What Happens Every Minute on the Internet
  • Proliferation of Rules Regarding Attorney Technical Competence
  • Important Cases in Technology Assisted Review
  • Key 2015 Federal Rules Changes and How They Impacted Case Law

I’ll be presenting the webcast with Julia Romero Peter, Esq., General Counsel and VP of Sales at CloudNine and we will condense over a year’s worth of key stories and trends down to a one hour presentation.  When I conducted this presentation recently at the February meeting of Houston Association of Litigation Support Managers, it was called “insightful and thought provoking”.

To register for the webcast, click here.  I write a daily blog and keep abreast of current eDiscovery trends to make it easier for you to keep up with those same trends – now, here’s an opportunity to do so in an hour.  Hope you can attend!

So, what do you think?  Are you up to date in the latest trends in eDiscovery?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.