In eDiscovery, look before you leap! You have filed a lawsuit and you are set for a “meet & greet” conference with opposing counsel(s) to review and agree on discovery. What should you expect from opposing counsel and their...more
Class actions often are lengthy and costly undertakings for defendants, and the discovery process can demand the most significant amount of resources. When discovery on class certification issues is then followed by merits...more
The United States District Court (Western District of Oklahoma) addressed in a January 11th Order the potential application of the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine to certain documents generated by...more
Some cases present issues that are difficult for the parties to litigate or for the courts to decide. But those cases tend to be the exception. Much of litigation—at least when practiced successfully—requires the mastery of a...more
Electronic discovery (a/k/a ediscovery and e-discovery) is the process of identifying, preserving, collecting, preparing, reviewing and producing electronically stored information (“ESI”) in the context of a legal or...more
The scope of discovery may be more limited than you think. The Cole’s Wexford opinion provides a thorough dissection of the history and past iterations of Rule 26 and a clear explanation of the status of the current rule as...more
A recent case in the Southern District of Florida serves as a reminder that even trade secrets may be subject to production to opposing counsel. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman recently ordered a defendant “swingers’” club...more
Mark Twain warned, “Do not tell fish stories where the people know you; but particularly, don’t tell them where they know the fish.” Litigants should heed this advice, as courts are proving to be less tolerant of discovery...more
Plaintiffs’ requested discovery is always too broad and burdensome, and the information defendants produce are always too narrow and few. This is a common theme across almost every patent case filed in the nation, often...more
Proportionality is not limited to Einstein’s equations and banter on The Big Bang Theory. The December 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure moved proportionality from Rule 26(b)(2)(C)(iii), which required a...more
Every year, The Sedona Conference Institute keeps us ahead of the e-discovery curve with panels such as the famous Case Law Update and Judicial Roundtable. This year’s Institute will be devoted to the changes in the Federal...more
The amendments to Rules 26(b)(1) and 26(b)(2)(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have been in effect for almost two months now. They are expected to change the way lawyers manage discovery and the way courts resolve...more
While 2015 will likely be remembered as the year the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were substantively overhauled to resolve many persistent issues related to e-discovery, 2016 quietly marks ten years since the Federal...more
Twitter is abuzz with messages about today’s effective date for the changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that read more like birth announcements (“It’s finally here!”). But figuring out what to do once you get that...more
Back in the days of paper discovery—when productions came in bankers’ boxes and document reviews involved paper cuts—litigators would attempt to try to gain a tactical advantage by “burying” opponents under mountains of...more
For over a hundred years Americans have enjoyed Josh Billing’s chestnut, “I’d rather not know so much, than to know so much that ain’t so.” For nearly seventy years, American lawyers have known one big thing that ain’t so:...more