Welcome to the Emerging Technologies and eDiscovery Disputes: Mock Meet and Confer Conference! Join us online for an interactive session where we simulate a meet and confer conference focusing on emerging technologies and...more
Key Points: The Superior Court of Delaware’s “meet and confer” requirement is mandated by the notice provision articulated in Del. R. Civ. P. Super. Ct. 37(a). The Rule has long been interpreted by counsel to require only an...more
Break the summertime blues with some red-hot eDiscovery case law disputes! Our June 2023 monthly webinar of cases covered by the eDiscovery Today blog discusses six disputes including a case where discovery is “like watching...more
Preparing for the Meet and Confer - Proper preparation and documentation during the Rule 26(f) meet and confer process will greatly improve efficiency in the ediscovery phase of your litigation....more
If you know your Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), you know that Rule 26(f) dictates a “conference of the parties” (also known as the “meet and confer”) “as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days before...more
This past year has brought lots of change, including an amendment to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 30(b)(6) governs the deposition of an organization (e.g., a corporation or a partnership) and...more
Deciding whether mobile devices should be imaged can be difficult when it comes to eDiscovery. They contain a large variety of file-types and data intermingled with a lot of private information, which may be privileged....more
Over the last year, requests and productions of native-format documents have featured regularly in ediscovery cases resolved by the courts. These cases have demonstrated how differently litigants—and judges—view the...more
In the hustle and bustle of ediscovery planning, we often focus more on the content of discoverable information than we do on its form. For example, in a hostile-workplace claim, you may know that you want all of the...more
Terramar Retail Centers LLC v. Marion #2-Seaport Trust, C.A. No 12875-VCL (Del. Ch. Dec. 4, 2018) - The Court of Chancery has long demanded that litigants abide by the discovery rules and respect scheduling orders. This is...more
It is well established that courts will support parties electing to use technology assisted review (TAR) to identify responsive documents in discovery. However, TAR methodologies and quality control (QC) measures are still...more
In a recent multi-district case involving patent infringement allegations relating to MRI imaging, Judge Stearns granted motions for protective orders directed to untimely-served subpoenas on third party customers. The case...more
The sixth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses. ...more
Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen agreed with UPS that it did not have to spend six months and $120,000 to recover data stored on backup tapes that may not be relevant to the case if UPS prevails in its efforts to limit the...more