Knotty Issues of eDiscovery
Magistrate Judge William Hussmann put a new spin on form of production analysis in Crissen v. Gupta: What form was discovery in and when was it in that form? The Plaintiff brought a motion for the production of Word documents in native file format. The Producing Party had produced the[…]
Read morePuerto Rico once again has issued a thought provoking eDiscovery opinion. It’s about time we hold a conference there. The Court found the Plaintiff had offered sufficient evidence that the Defendant had a duty to preserve the personal email accounts of its former officers. The Court explained the email accounts[…]
Read moreSome cases begin with such a “wow” introduction they have to be seen to be believed: To put it lightly, there has been a severe shortcoming by Defendants in this action during the discovery process. Not only have Defendants’ resisted providing required information in initial disclosures and resisted previous discovery[…]
Read moreW Holding Co. v. Chartis Ins. Co., is a case involving competing proposed discovery protocols. The parties include the FDIC as the receiver of a bank and the former bank directors & officers in a $176 million suit with claims of negligence in making loans. W Holding Co. v. Chartis[…]
Read moreThere are judges who have a way with words when they want to make a point. One example of such judicial prose was by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows in Botell v. United States: At this juncture, the United States has purportedly been looking for documents for months, yet the[…]
Read moreTips on reviewing electronic discovery, including issue tagging for causes of action or defenses and eDiscovery project management.
Read moreIn a dispute over a will and deed transfer, a New York State Court ordered the examination of a lawyer’s computer. The idea of an attorney’s computer being searched by third parties should scare lawyers to death. The attorney objected on the grounds the examination would violate the attorney-client privilege[…]
Read moreAlso Posted on frank! The Nextpoint Blog There are phrases a lawyer never wants to hear a judge say. One is your law firm “acted negligently in failing to comply with its discovery obligations.” Another is your client “acted willfully in failing to comply with its discovery obligations and assist[…]
Read moreA Producing Party (the Defendant) argued against searching for responsive electronically stored information, claiming “that the mere fact an employee might have discoverable information or relevant knowledge does not necessarily mean she possesses relevant documents.” McNearney v. Wash. Dep’t of Corr., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108386, 14-16 (W.D. Wash. Aug.[…]
Read more
A company outsourcing payroll, human resources and other business services to third parties is standard operating procedure today. However, what happens when there are discovery requests for a party’s business information hosted by a third-party? Such discovery requests caused a court to play butcher to carve out the discovery obligations[…]
Read more