Josh Gilliland

The California CCP Knows the Difference Between Documents and ESI

January 6, 2020 Josh Gilliland California Electronic Discovery Act, Document Review, Electronically Stored Information

There is a very important reality to remember when it comes to discovery: documents do not mean electronically stored information. It is time to get used to that distinction and stop saying, “document” when a lawyer means, “electronically stored information.” The reason is simple: the new California Code of Civil[…]

Please Don’t Ask ESI to be Printed for Production and Other Lessons about Rule 26(f) Conferences

December 16, 2019 Josh Gilliland Form of Production, Request for Production

Two ways to improve discovery productions is to clearly state the form of production in the discovery request and to have a meaningful meet and confer about producing discovery. Failing to do either can result in motion practice. In this dispute, the requesting party claimed the electronically stored information (ESI)[…]

Trends in Proportionality – Guest Post for Prism Litigation

November 13, 2019 Josh Gilliland Proportionality

Lawsuits are about people. Who did what when is the crux of every dispute. Living in an age where people can send email, text, and chat from their phones, there can be a lot of places to look for discoverable data in a dispute. The proliferation of data could make[…]

Neutral Third Party Hosted Repositories for Mediation

September 26, 2019 Josh Gilliland Document Review, eDiscovery, Hosted Review Platform

Cloud hosted repositories can be very effective in controlling eDiscovery costs. Data can be hosted and access shared to the litigants to review specific data. Permissions can be devised so neither side can see the work product of the other, only the data. The California Court of Appeal weighed in[…]

Don’t Ignore the Plain Text of Rule 26(a)

February 15, 2019 Josh Gilliland eDiscovery, Initial Disclosures

The drafters of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure did not add words as filler for Rule 26(a)(1). Litigants are required to disclose “the name and, if known, the address and telephone number of each individual likely to have discoverable information.” Furthermore, parties must provide copies or descriptions of “all[…]

Proportionality in Restoring Parent-Child Attachments

January 23, 2019 Josh Gilliland Proportionality, Request for Production

Maintaining the parent-child relationship in productions is a long recognized requirement. A Defendant that switched archiving applications learned how tricky preservation can be in a lawsuit when attachments were not included with the parent email in a production. Here is what happened: The Defendant used Mimosa to achieve email prior[…]

If You Can Get ESI from Another Source, then No Sanctions under Rule 37(e)

January 16, 2019 Josh Gilliland Intent to Deprive, Spoliation

Discovery gamesmanship is annoying. A party failing to produce email is obnoxious. Can a party that fails to produce four emails that were available from other sources be grounds for sanctions? In a contract dispute over whether there were grounds to terminate a master service agreement, the Requesting Party sought[…]

Limiting Undue Burden with Wildcard Searches

January 7, 2019 Josh Gilliland eDiscovery, Request for Production, Scope of Discovery, Undue Burden

Records management can be extremely complex. So can the preservation of evidence and responding to discovery requests. In a case involving Fair Credit Report Act claims, Equifax objected to discovery requests for consumer dispute information. The Producing Party claimed that the requested information was not in a “readily accessible format,[…]

Happy 10 Year Anniversary!

December 30, 2018 Josh Gilliland eDiscovery, Electronically Stored Information

Bow Tie Law first went live on December 30, 2008. I want to thank everyone who has been a steadfast reader and friend over the last 10 years. I wanted to share the “origin story” of the blog on its anniversary. I first started wearing bow ties in January 2007.[…]

Organizing a Production Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 34(b)(2)(E)

December 29, 2018 Josh Gilliland eDiscovery, Electronically Stored Information, Metadata

December 1, 2006 seems like a lifetime ago when the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure first truly incorporated rules for electronically stored information. It was a time before to iPhones, Netflix, or Marvel movies. Fast-forward to the end of 2018 and attorneys are still having challenges with producing electronically stored[…]