The September 6, 2024, decision in In Re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, 2024 WL 4125618 (N.D. Cal. 2024), applies the “legal control” standard to Fed.R.Civ.P. 34 discovery...more
Felder v. MGM National Harbor, LLC, 2024 WL 3690779(D. Md. Aug. 7, 2024)(Simms, J.), addresses several important issues. First, in Felder, the Court ordered the parties to conduct a “meet and confer” session. That,...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published August 21, 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...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published July 24, 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
In Linet Americas, Inc. v. Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., 2024 WL 3425795 (N.D. Ill. Jul. 15, 2024), the court enforced an ESI Protocol that called for a “metadata-only” privilege log, even though parts of the metadata were...more
It is not auspicious when a court writes: “The court notes that, from time to time, in contentious cases like this one, courts have ordered that the parties record – by video or court reporter – their Local Rule 37.2...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published May 15, 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
In one of the opening paragraphs of In Re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, 2024 WL 1786293, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 20, 2024), the court wrote: At the hearing, the Court...more
In Rayome v. ABT Electronics, 2024 WL 1435098 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 3, 2024), the court wrote that “it would be in the parties’ interest to reach a negotiated result. It should not be forgotten that a party could be ‘right,’ but...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
No one else can “eclipse” our coverage of eDiscovery case law! Our April 2024 monthly webinar of cases covered by the eDiscovery Today blog discusses disputes related to relevance and privacy of an unpublished autobiography,...more
California has enacted changes to its Civil Discovery Act so that discovery procedures in California state court are now more closely aligned with the federal court system’s initial disclosure requirements. California also...more
January is a time to set goals and ponder what the new year will bring. It is also a time to think about what happened last year. In the world of litigation, it is important for lawyers and eDiscovery professionals to take...more
[Editor’s Note: This article was first published December 21, 2023 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...more
Parties can live with a good call or a bad one, but they need the balls and strikes called promptly. The United States District Court for the District of Maryland has established several processes for avoiding discovery...more
[Editor’s Note: This article has been republished with permission. It was originally published November 9, 2023 on the eDiscovery Assistant Blog] In Episode 123, CEO and Founder of eDiscovery Assistant, Kelly Twigger,...more
“A trial-level judge in New York has sanctioned [attorneys’ name deleted] for ‘rummaging’ through the Dropbox of its litigation opponent after a third-party vendor accidentally revealed the link in discovery.” D. Cassens...more
[EDRM Editor’s Note: This article was first published here on November 1, 2023 and EDRM is grateful to Michael Berman, for permission to republish. The opinions and positions are those of Michael Berman.] In three recent...more
The Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for October 2023 covers three decisions addressing the scope of the work-product and attorney-client privileges, limits on the use of a defendant’s use of its own patents during...more
Default judgments as a sanction for discovery violations are rare. Egregious conduct and failure to comply with multiple court orders usually precede the entry of a default judgment. Originally published in The Daily...more
Fall is in the air and so is the whiff of sanctions! Our September 2023 monthly webinar of cases covered by the eDiscovery Today blog discusses six disputes including sanctions for discovery violations & misrepresentations,...more
In the beginning, there was paper. And lots of it. Seriously warehouses stacked with banker’s boxes as far as the eye could see. And the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were designed to support paper discovery in the...more
Federal and state rules of civil procedure are intended to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action. However, one activity that can thwart that goal is discovery, because the discovery process is...more
On April 20, 2023, Magistrate Judge Ann Marie Donio of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey issued a comprehensive opinion concerning the appropriate level of sanctions for discovery misconduct. ...more