The Discovery Update December 2016

/
18Dec2016

The Discovery Update December 2016

  • Sheila Atkinson-Baker
  • 1 Tags
  • Comments

From the President

Throughout 2016, in the Discovery Update, we have covered a wide range of discovery subjects, from articles covering eDiscovery trends to the more technical aspects of eDiscovery, from information governance to guidelines on the duty to preserve, and from use of social media as evidence to document preservation best practices.  Most of these articles were written by professionals in their fields of endeavor.  All of these newsletters and articles are accessible to you at depo.com in the “Client Resources” tab.

Happy Holidays!

Sheila Atkinson-Baker

 

Key Takeaways from the Sedona Conference Commentary on Defense of E-Discovery Process

By Natalya Northrip

The Sedona Conference Working Group on Electronic Document Retention and Production (WG1) has proposed a set of principles and practical guidance for the eDiscovery process in its recent publication, “Commentary on Defense of Process: Principles and Guidelines for Developing and Implementing a Sound E-Discovery Process” (available for download here). The Commentary seeks to address what parties can do to avoid, or at the least prepare for, challenges to an eDiscovery process they apply in a given matter and how courts should address discovery disputes.  The public comment period on the Commentary has now closed.

Read full article here.

 

Broad Discovery Requests and Objecting with Specificity

By Joshua Gilliland

Drafting discovery requests is an art.  Knowing how to object is a skill.  Producing responsive information takes both skills.

Federal Courts are serious about objections now must “state with specificity” the reasons for an objection pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 34(b)(2(B).  Judge Richard Bourgeois stated the following after citing the new rule in a trucking accident case:

“Any general objection presumably applicable to all discovery requests that fails to comply with Rule 34 is insufficient and will not be considered by the Court.”  Nkansah v. Martinez, No. 15-646-JWD-RLB, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154078, at *10 n.1 (M.D. La. Nov. 7, 2016).

Read full article here.

 

side1

KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THE SEDONA CONFERENCE COMMENTARY ON DEFENSE OF E-DISCOVERY PROCESS

BROAD DISCOVERY REQUESTS AND OBJECTING WITH SPECIFICITY

RECENT TRENDS AND CASES IN E-DISCOVERY LAW

WHY E-DISCOVERY IS IMPORTANT TO ALL OF US

ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY BEST PRACTICES

LIT SOFTWARE – TRANSCRIPT PAD

WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED

E-Discovery Travel Guide Prepares Legal Teams for Adventure

Some Things Don’t Need to be Discovered

 

side2

Recent Trends & Cases in eDiscovery Law
Read it »

Why eDiscovery is Important to All of  Us
Read it »

side3

Electronic Discovery Best Practices
Read it »

Lit Software- Transcript Pad
Read it »

side4

HEAD SCRATCHER

With pointed fangs I sit and wait.  With piercing force I crunch out fate.  Grabbing victims, proclaiming might, physically joining with a single bite. 

What am I?

Email us the right answer and you could be randomly drawn as the winner of a $25 gift card!

Last month’s answer