Direct Examination: To Lead or Not to Lead
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 416: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 224: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
The Only Rule of Multidistrict Litigation Is...
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Practicing Before the U.S. Supreme Court | Kannon Shanmugam | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Amended Rules Five Months Later: Early Trends in Case Law and What It Means
Proposed FRCP Changes: Effect on eDiscovery, RIM & IG (CLE)
3: Preparing Your Inside Team - Preservation, Privilege, Potential Pitfalls -This is the third in a series of articles that explores considerations and suggested actions for in-house counsel who are inexperienced in patent...more
This Sidley Update addresses the following recent developments and court decisions involving e-discovery issues: 1. an order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California granting a motion to compel...more
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) brought an action against 18 defendants under the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) for engaging in or substantially...more
Certain information generated by your company, even the results of entire investigations, may be legally protected from exposure to people outside the company. While this seems like the holy grail to executives worried about...more
In 2019, the Missouri legislature passed Senate Bill 224 (SB 224), effectively revising Missouri’s discovery rules to align them with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (See our 2019 post for analysis of SB 224’s changes...more
As California begins preparing to ease shelter-in-place restrictions, the state’s technology industry is facing the most challenging economic circumstances in recent memory. The state’s technology companies may place new...more
Recently, the Missouri legislature passed Senate Bill 224 outlining a brand new set of discovery rules for Missouri state-court cases. These new rules represent a comprehensive revision to the existing rules and make the...more
While the attorney-client privilege only protects confidential communications between an attorney and client that are for the purpose of giving or receiving legal advice, the work product doctrine, as codified in Fed. R. Civ....more
Attorneys who appear in both state and federal courts must be familiar with the differences between the two systems. While some rules have harmonized over time,[1] other procedures are entirely distinct. As a matter of...more
One of the big Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Enforcement litigation developments of the past two years has been the federal judiciary’s rejection of the agency’s “de novo review” position in electricity market...more
You are defending your client, a company engaged in complex scientific or technical work. As you head to trial, you have a tough decision to make. The client has employees and consultants with the knowledge and expertise to...more
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3) and its state counterparts protect from discovery "documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation." This obviously includes civil litigation. But what about other forms...more
You may have learned everything you need to know in kindergarten, but perhaps sharing is overrated when it comes to a search-term hit report. A search-term hit report is generated when search terms are applied to a larger set...more
According to at least one administrative law judge, neither the work product privilege nor the attorney-client privilege allows an Arizona metal producer and its contractor to withhold factual information gathered during the...more
Although the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure describe the work product doctrine in a single sentence, federal courts interpret that sentence in wildly varied ways. Four federal court decisions issued in just a nine-day...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently ruled that the “common interest” doctrine protects legal and tax liability analysis prepared for a client and subsequently shared with a consortium of banks providing...more
One of the great ironies of work product protection involves federal courts' widely varying interpretation of the single sentence codifying the Federal Rules' work product protection. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3)(A). Among many...more
Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows corporations' adversaries to insist that the corporation select a spokesman to provide binding testimony about designated topics. These depositions almost...more
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and most state court rules memorialize their basic work product doctrine in just one sentence. But courts take divergent views on what that sentence means. ...more
On September 17, the U.S. Tax Court, in Dynamo Holdings LP v. Commissioner, 143 T.C. No. 9 (Sept. 17, 2014), held that a taxpayer could use predictive coding, over the objection of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), to...more
On June 27, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an opinion clarifying the application of the attorney-client privilege in internal investigations. ...more
Recently, we released a legal alert discussing the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision in Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 13 (February 27, 2014), which addressed the intersection of NRS 50.125...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware recently interpreted the work product privilege in a manner favorable to taxpayers, ruling that documents can be prepared “in anticipation of litigation” even if created...more