Electronically stored information (“ESI”) is ubiquitous and most people and companies are utilizing paperless documents in some form (i.e., e-mails, text messages, IMs). The many forms of ESI coupled with the introduction of varying data sources such as smartphones, cloud storage, iPads, and tablets, has dramatically expanded the available potential sources of discovery in a civil litigation. To obtain this
Continue Reading The Document Demand That Seeks Electronically Stored Information
E-discovery
What Should Lawyers Look for in an E-Discovery Vendor?
In recent years, there has been a dramatic increase in e-discovery vendors. While having more vendor options to choose from may seem like a good thing, the surge in vendors can make it difficult to differentiate among them, and to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. It is therefore critical that law firms and legal departments who seek…
Continue Reading What Should Lawyers Look for in an E-Discovery Vendor?
What Is E-Discovery?
I am often asked by clients and subscribers to the blog, What is E-discovery? And so, this week’s post is intended to respond to that question.
E-discovery is the abbreviated term for electronic discovery and refers to the process in which electronic data (as compared to paper or object information) is sought, located, secured, reviewed and produced for use as…
Continue Reading What Is E-Discovery?
De-duplication: What is it and Why Should I Use it?
De-duplication (“de-duping”) is the process of comparing electronic records based on their content and characteristics and removing duplicate records from the data set so that only one instance of an electronic record is produced when there two or more identical copies. De-duplicating a data set is a smart way to reduce volume and increase efficiencies of review. There are three…
Continue Reading De-duplication: What is it and Why Should I Use it?
What is EDRM?
The Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) is a framework that outlines standards for the recovery and discovery of digital data. An EDRM diagram created by Duke Law (https://www.edrm.net/frameworks-and-standards/edrm-model/) represents a conceptual view of the e-discovery process, which is not a linear process, necessarily. In fact, you may engage in some, but not all of the steps identified in…
Continue Reading What is EDRM?
The New Rules of Federal Evidence Have Arrived
Earlier this year, I wrote about the then-proposed changes to the Federal Rules, and how those changes (if implemented), could impact electronic discovery. (February 15, 2017 blog) Well, the time has come — effective December 1, 2017, the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 902 “Evidence That is Self Authenticating” went live.
As the title suggests, Federal Rule…
Continue Reading The New Rules of Federal Evidence Have Arrived
Client’s Bad Behavior Imputed to Counsel – Both Get Sanctioned
In Arrowhead Capital Fin. Ltd. v. Seven Arts Entertainment, Inc. 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126545 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2016), District Judge Katherine Polk Failla imposed significant sanctions upon both the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and the lawyer for defendant Seven Arts Entertainment Inc. (“SAE”).
Background
Arrowhead Capital Finance, Ltd. (“Arrowhead”) sued SAE in 2014 seeking to enforce a judgment…
Continue Reading Client’s Bad Behavior Imputed to Counsel – Both Get Sanctioned
Counsel’s Failure to be Meaningfully Involved with Client’s Discovery Collection Costs Client One Half Million Dollars in Discovery Sanctions
On October 4, 2016, District Judge Jon S. Tigar issued an opinion every federal court practitioner should read (Rodman v Safeway, Inc., [11-cv-03003] [N.D. Ca.] [JST]). The decision serves as an important reminder that counsel has an obligation to assist their client when identifying and collecting electronic documents responsive to discovery demands. Indeed, it is not sufficient or defensible …
Continue Reading Counsel’s Failure to be Meaningfully Involved with Client’s Discovery Collection Costs Client One Half Million Dollars in Discovery Sanctions
The Southern District of New York Rules that It Cannot Force a Responding Party To Use Technology Assisted Review When Searching for Documents
In Hyles v. New York City et. al., (Case No. 10-3119, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100390 [S.D.N.Y. Aug. 1, 2016], the plaintiff, an African-American female employed by the City of New York, was demoted. Specifically, she was replaced by a white male and demoted to a different position with a lesser salary. Ultimately, plaintiff sued the City for discrimination…
Who Exactly Qualifies as the Prevailing Party Entitled to Costs in a Mixed Judgment Case? And What Exactly Are Recoverable Production Costs?
Mobile Telecomms. Techs., LLC, v. Samsung Telecomms. Am., LLC, 2015 WL 5719123, (E.D. Tex. Sept. 28, 2015)
In this patent infringement case, M-Tel contested a prior ruling by the District Court, which held that Samsung had not infringed upon patents owned by M-Tel. M-Tel claimed that Samsung was not the prevailing party as both the plaintiff and defendant won…