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
[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 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
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
In our digital world, one might think that the production format of electronically stored information, or ESI, in civil litigation is no longer controversial, but recent court decisions make it clear that is not the case. ...more
Maybe some of you will look at the title of this article, smirk, and dismissively mutter that there is nothing new about text messages. eDiscovery practitioners also may think there is nothing revolutionary about considering...more
In Youngevity Intl’s Corp. v. Smith (No: 16-cv-00704 [SD CA December 21, 2017]), defendants sought an Order pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(g) and 37. The Order required Plaintiffs to remediate an improper...more
In Fulton v. Livingston Financial LLC, 2016 WL 3976558 (W.D. Wash. July 25, 2016), U.S. District Judge James L. Robart sanctioned a defense lawyer who “inexcusabl[y]” relied on outdated case law and pre-2015 amendments to...more