Views from the Bench: A Conversation with the Judiciary
The U.S. Supreme Court on April 17, 2025, issued a greatly anticipated decision in which the justices unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging a prohibited transaction under Section 1106(a)(1)(C) of the Employee Retirement...more
The California Supreme Court has clarified how the cost-shifting provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998 (“Section 998”) may apply when a case settles before trial. In a recent decision, Madrigal v....more
In Geezil v. White Cliffs Condo. Four Ass’n, 105 Mass. App. Ct. 103 (2024), the Massachusetts Appeals Court held that an association of condominium unit owners was not responsible for the expense of accommodating an...more
Last week a trial court in Alameda County entered an order permitting Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. to recover nearly $125,000 in costs from the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA). Hobby Lobby incurred these...more
The Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) includes numerous provisions relevant to government contractors in areas such as artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, supply chain concerns related to...more
Reasonable expenses for an expert witness deposition surely include the expert’s travel time, airfare and hotel accommodations. Right? It’s true that litigators are free to make their own financial arrangements regarding the...more
A divided court in Madrigal v. Hyundai Motor America (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 385, as modified on denial of reh’g (May 9, 2023), review filed (June 20, 2023) recently held that the cost-shifting penalty provisions of California...more
For years, there’s been a popular sentiment that the absence of economies of scale made ediscovery impractical for small law firms, especially those with infrequent cases. While that may have been a legitimate argument in...more
In Mostafavi Law Group, APC v. Larry Rabineau, APC (B302344, Mar. 3, 2021), the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (Los Angeles), addressed an issue of first impression: whether the purported acceptance of...more
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920, a prevailing party may have a right to recover certain costs associated with the litigation. Many prevailing parties seek to recoup costs attendant to e-discovery, given the expense associated...more
The world revolves around data. Businesses and individuals generate data each day between work and personal communication. While electronic platforms provide convenience, efficiency, and flexibility in document review for...more
All courts agree that litigants asserting attorney-client privilege or work product protection must establish the protection's applicability. But courts take different positions on whether any presumptions guide their...more
New York CPLR 3122(d) provides that the “reasonable production expenses” incurred by a non-party’s compliance with a subpoena shall be defrayed by the party issuing the subpoena....more
Recent case law reveals that courts vary widely in their approaches to shifting the costs and fees incurred in responding to a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena. Originally published in Law360 - February 12,...more
Judges presiding over multidistrict litigation can reduce discovery abuse by requiring litigants to pay for “core document” requests and shifting production costs to plaintiffs who cannot meet some threshold showing of merit....more
The cost of arbitration, including attorneys’ fees, can be substantial, commensurate with the matters in dispute. Your desire to settle a dispute that is going to arbitration is often as or more substantial. But sometimes...more
The ninth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses....more
Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.300, a court may permit a party to withdraw an admission made in response to a request for admission upon noticed motion. The court may only do so, however, “if it...more
The eighth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses....more
On August 25, 2017, Justice Shirley Werner Kornreich of the New York Commercial Division entered an order reprimanding a high-profile lawyer, Mark Geragos, for misconduct during a deposition, including refusing to answer...more
Discovery is not about gamesmanship, and parties are expected to engage in meaningful negotiation about the terms of discovery agreements. That is the message from Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson of the Eastern District of New...more
The seventh edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, and discovery responses....more
The fourth edition of The E-Discovery Digest focuses on recent decisions addressing the scope and application of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine, spoliation, cost shifting and other e-discovery issues....more
With the ninth Contracting State having ratified the EU Unified Patent Court Agreement, the commencement of the Unified Patent Court is approaching. We report on the latest news, including an announcement about opt-outs, and...more
The North Carolina Utilities Commission recently ruled that third-party sales of solar-generated electricity violate state law. The Commission rejected a test case brought by an advocacy group seeking to legitimize such...more