eDiscovery Case Law Podcast: How Failing to Meet and Confer Effectively Can Lead to Sanctions
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 302: Listen and Learn -- More on Discovery (Civ Pro)
Podcast: Are Legal Holds Protected by Privilege? Insights from the FTC's Battle with Amazon
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Does your bring-your-own-device (BYOD) policy quietly wall-off the best evidence in your next case? A March 17, 2025 Special-Master ruling in Allergan, Inc. v. Revance Therapeutics, Inc. says it might—denying a motion to...more
In Abrego-Garcia v. Noem, __ F.R.D. ___, 2025 WL 1166402 (D. Md. Apr. 22, 2025)(Xinis, J.), plaintiffs notified the Court of “seemingly intractable discovery disputes….” The case is before the District Court after the United...more
In Pincus Law Grp PLLC v. MJ Connections, Inc., 2025 WL 1070384 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 9, 2025), the court ruled in favor of a discovering party and ordered reproduction of previously-produced documents under the terms of an ESI...more
Magistrate Judge Scott Hardy delivers a masterclass on what the meet-and-confer requirement really means in federal litigation—and the serious consequences of failing to cooperate in discovery. In this riveting breakdown of...more
In litigation, especially in dealing with E-Discovery, the importance of an effective electronically stored information agreement (“ESI Agreement”) between the parties is a must to help prevent discovery disputes. This is...more
If you’ve been around the ediscovery space long enough, you’ve likely heard the term “drive-by meet and confer.” It’s what happens when counsel shows up to a Rule 26(f) conference unprepared, without the necessary knowledge...more
In Cooper v. Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., 2025 WL 404246 (D. Md. Feb. 5, 2025)(Coulson, J.), Ms. Cooper sued BG&E and another employer for sexual harassment and discrimination....more
I have never heard of a “destruction/unavailable” log; however, in the comprehensive – indeed, exhaustive – decision of Leprino Foods Co. v. Avani Outpatient Surgical Center, Inc., 2024 WL 4488711 (C.D. Ca. Sep. 30, 2024),...more
Every week, the Array team reviews the latest news and analysis about the evolving field of eDiscovery to bring you the topics and trends you need to know. This week’s post covers the period of September 23-29. Here’s what’s...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published September 25, 2024, and EDRM is grateful to Tom Paskowitz and Robert Keeling of our Trusted Partner, Sidley, for permission to republish. The opinions and positions are those...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published June 18, 2024 and EDRM is grateful to Tom Paskowitz and Robert Keeling of our Trusted Partner, Sidley, for permission to republish. The opinions and positions are those of the...more
In Fiskars Finland OY AB v. Woodland Tools Inc., 2024 WL 2504717 (W.D. Wisc. May 24, 2024), plaintiff sued for alleged misappropriation of trade secrets. Defendants counterclaimed....more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published April 17, 2024 and EDRM is grateful to Tom Paskowitz and Robert Keeling of our Trusted Partner, Sidley, for permission to republish. The opinions and positions are those of the...more
That is what makes the recent decision in M1 Holdings, Inc. v. Members 1st Fed. Credit Union, 2024 WL 182220 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 17, 2024), interesting. Both of the disputing litigants were ordered to state under oath that they...more
This Sidley Update addresses the following recent developments and court decisions involving e-discovery issues: 1. an order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California granting a motion to compel...more
[Editor’s Note: This article has been republished with permission. It was originally published November 9, 2023 on the eDiscovery Assistant Blog] This week’s decision comes to us from the case titled 6340 NB LLC v. Cap. One,...more
Here is what we cover in this issue of Employment Law Reporter Autumn 2023: • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York...more
In a case before the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, the court largely rejected the defendants’ arguments to avoid supplementation to their discovery production, and granted in part the plaintiff’s motions to...more
It’s not a heat wave, it’s a wave of hot eDiscovery case law disputes! Our August 2023 monthly webinar of cases covered by the eDiscovery Today blog discusses six disputes including a motion to compel a forensic examination...more
During eDiscovery, parties typically expect to receive productions of documents in the form requested or in the form mandated by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Rule 34, the documents must be produced “as they are...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published June 14, 2023 and EDRM is grateful to Robert Keeling, Chair of the EDRM Global Advisory Council and our Trusted Partner, Sidley, for permission to republish.] This Sidley...more
February 14th is for lovers – of unique and interesting eDiscovery case law disputes! Our February 2023 monthly webinar of cases covered by the eDiscovery Today blog discusses six disputes including declaration of a...more
“We are family.” If you are like many people, you can’t read those words without singing them. Unlike the joyous refrains of Sister Sledge, however, the idea of family may take on a more ominous tone when viewed in the...more
Citing new deposition testimony, actor Justin Theroux in a recent motion asked the New York Supreme Court to reconsider its December 2020 denial of Theroux’s motion to compel production of emails that his neighbor, Norman...more
Drachman v. BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc., C.A. No. 2019-0728-LWW (Del. Ch. Aug. 25, 2021) - Drachman addresses the attorney-client privilege, certain exceptions thereto, including the Garner doctrine, and...more