ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY Practices & Checklist
|
|
- Elijah Wiggins
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY Practices & Checklist Bradley J. Gross, Esq. * Becker & Poliakoff, P.A Stirling Road Fort Lauderdale, FL (954) BGross@Becker-Poliakoff.com * Chair, e-business & Digital Content Practice Group, Becker & Poliakoff, P.A.
2 Introduction: Electronic Discovery The volume of electronic information created during the ordinary course of business exposes companies to increased risk. Deleted information is often not deleted. Instead, references to the location of the information are deleted, giving the illusion that the information has been destroyed. Back-ups, or archived data, can become huge depositories of information. Computer programs can create duplicate copies of documents, or store web pages in memory. Careless employees send information via ; Disgruntled employees can copy / steal information. Electronic versions of documents can contain metadata (or, information about information ) that is non-existent in hard copies. Locations are varied: workstations, servers, backup media, PDAs, mobile telephones, off-site storage, flash media, etc. Electronic documents are often easier to search and browse than paper-based documents. Consequently, it is easier than ever to find the proverbial needle in a haystack. EXAMPLE IranGate (1981) Hostages released purportedly in response to Reagan presidency. thought to have been destroyed, but copies were found on backup tapes. Cartoon from Paul Szep, Boston Globe, (July 1987). Page 2 of 7
3 Best Practice: Document Retention / Destruction Policy To begin, you should recognize the fact that the term document retention policy has little to do with retention, and everything to do with destruction. (Though, admittedly, the term retention sounds far less nefarious than the term destruction. ) Document retention policies are not only legal, but I encourage all of my corporate clients to have them. Simply put, unless there is a statutory or overriding corporate reason to hang on to old records, outdated or expired records should be destroyed. By destroying old records, companies can maintain efficient and organized filing systems, eliminate confusion over different iterations of documents, substantially lower the risk of theft and/or misuse of old records, as well as lower (or eliminate) archiving, storage and warehousing costs. There is no template for a document retention policy, and each company should evaluate its needs on an individual basis. That said, however, there are certain rules of thumb that you should follow when drafting a document retention policy: 1. The document retention policy must apply to all employees who obtain (regardless of the duration of such possession), create, manipulate, analyze, or store physical or electronic documents that belong to, or are created or received by, a company. 2. The term document should be defined broadly to ensure that all documents, regardless of size or importance, are treated equally. For example, the term documents could be defined as all notes, memos, messages, reports, analyses, receipts, forms, schedules, charts, graphs and related materials that exist in physical form (i.e., paper form), or which exist and/or are stored in electronic form on desktop computers, laptop computers, personal digital assistants (often called PDAs ), or in other electronic devices that are capable of storing such information. should be treated the same as paper documents. 3. Records that are known to be relevant to a pending or impending litigation matter should not be destroyed. Destruction of such documents could lead to causes of action for spoliation, court sanctions, or default judgments. 4. The predicate for the policy should be explicitly stated in the policy itself. Put another way, a company should have legitimate business reasons for destroying their records, and those reasons should be stated at the beginning of the policy. 5. Statutory retention periods MUST be followed strictly. Retention periods vary widely depending on the types of records at issue. In addition, certain documents will naturally fit into a designated category (such as HIPAA records or Sarbanes-Oxley records ); but some will not. Do not merely assume that a particular document fits into a particular category. If you have any question as to how a particular document should be categorized, consult an attorney. Page 3 of 7
4 6. Destruction schedules should be followed strictly. Failure to enforce consistent destruction schedules could lead to an inference that records are destroyed for illegitimate reasons (e.g., to avoid litigation). 7. A single person should enforce the record retention policy, as well as the record destruction schedule. This minimizes the risk of inconsistent document handling. Selected Caselaw: Lewy v. Remington Arms Co., 836 F.2d 1104 (8 th Cir. 1988): Widely regarded as the seminal case in connection with document retention policies. Court created a three-part test to determine the reasonableness of a document destruction policy: (i) the reasonableness of the policy in light of the facts and circumstances surrounding the documents to be destroyed; (ii) the degree to which litigation involving the documents was likely; and, (iii) whether the policy was instituted in bad faith. Vick v. Texas Employment Commission, 514 F.2d 734, 737 (5 th Cir. 1975): Fifth Circuit refused to give an adverse instruction where records destroyed were destroyed under routine procedures without bad faith. Turner v. Hudson Transit Lines, Inc., 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2827, reh g denied, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3290 (S.D.N.Y. 1992): Held that defendants could not rely on their document destruction policy to excuse them from destroying documents relevant to the litigation; [A] corporation cannot blindly destroy documents and expect to be shielded by a seemingly innocuous document retention policy. Computer Associates International, Inc. v. American Fundware, Inc., 133 F.R.D. 166 (D. Colo. 1990): Court granted default judgment against defendant where it was shown that defendant willfully destroyed documents after the company was put on notice that the documents would be relevant to the litigation. Murphy Oil USA, Inc. v. Fluor Daniel, Inc., No. Civ. A , 2002 WL (E.D. La. Feb. 19, 2002): Court sanctioned defendant where defendant failure to adhere to its own document destruction schedule caused defendant to destroy documents relevant to the litigation. Page 4 of 7
5 E-Discovery Checklist The Stages of E-Discovery: Pre-Litigation, Litigation/Discovery, Post-Litigation 1. Familiarize yourself with the business structure and corporate operations. a. Map out the divisions and business units, and the operations in which each is engaged. b. Determine what type of information is received. c. Determine how information is received. d. Determine how / where information is stored. e. Determine how information is retrieved. f. Determine the costs of retrieval. 2. Initial Document Retention Policy Due Diligence. a. Collect existing retention policies. b. Identify employees responsible for retention/destruction, and speak with them to determine retention/destruction procedures. c. Identify gaps in retention policies, schedules, enforcement and monitoring. 3. Document Retention Policy Creation / Enforcement. a. Draft a single document retention policy. b. Ensure that the policy addresses electronic information; document retention periods; document destruction schedules; cessation of policy in the event of actual or threatened litigation; enforcement mechanisms; monitoring mechanisms. c. Review the policy with various levels of administration to ensure company s ability to implement the policy. 4. Information Technology Personnel. a. Identify / establish a relationship with key IT personnel. b. Provide specific guidance / training to IT personnel to ensure ambiguities in retention / destruction policies are eliminated. 5. Anticipate Discovery Requests / Protocols. a. Organize retained documents in a manner that will ease discovery of relevant documents. (Options include physical marking, keywords, file names, etc.) b. Label privileged documents to ensure that such documents are not accidentally disclosed in discovery procedures. Remember: Documents inadvertently disclosed in discovery may result in the waiver of the attorney-client privilege with respect to those documents and other materials related to them. See Texaco P.R., Inc. v. Dept. of Consumer Affairs, 60 F.3d 867, (1 st Cir. 1995). c. Ensure that preservation letters are handled appropriately. Page 5 of 7
6 1. (In extreme cases): Consider obtaining an ex parte seizure order. a. Effective, but difficult to obtain. b. Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides the primary source of judicial authority for issuing ex parte orders. Rule 65(b) provides that a court may issue a TRO without notice to the opposing party if a movant can show: i. that immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage will occur before the opposing party has an opportunity to respond; ii. the movant s efforts, if any, in providing prior notice to the opposing party or establishing reasons why notice was not given. c. Other factors considered in a Rule 65 motion are (i) the movant s likelihood of success on the merits of his claim, (ii) whether less drastic and adequate remedies are available, (iii) a balancing of the hardships of the parties, and (iv) the effect of the ex parte order on the public interest. 2. Preservation Letter: Ensure that a preservation letter is timely delivered to a party possessing electronic records. a. Broad reminder of duty to preserve; specific examples to eliminate any doubt or ambiguity as to the types of records at issue. b. Ensure that your client / company preserves its own records that are (or are likely to be) relevant to the litigation, regardless of whether a preservation letter is received. c. Require opposing counsel to confirm that destruction policies have been suspended, and that preservation policies have been implemented. If confirmation is not timely supplied, seek a preservation order on an emergency basis pursuant to Rule 16(c) (which describes the court s inherent ability to control the production, disclosure and scheduling of discovery). 3. Confer with opposing counsel to seek agreement on (i) the types of documents to be produced, (ii) the form / format of the documents to be produced, (iii) the costs of document production, and (iv) the confidentiality of the documents to be produced. Costshifting arguments should be addressed promptly. Note: This may be done pursuant to a Rule 16 conference. 4. Review document requests with IT personnel. Do not assume that requests will be selfexplanatory. Determine whether in-house personnel will be capable of producing requested documents, or whether outside consultants will be needed. Determine the form in which electronic documents must be produced. 5. Review all discovery before it is provided to opposing counsel. Ensure that privileged documents are filtered out. 6. Maintain a list of all electronic documents provided to opposing counsel. Page 6 of 7
7 7. Maintain the chain of custody by documenting the following: a. The date, time and place of collection of electronic evidence received from opposing party. b. The name and title of the person providing the electronic evidence to you, and the name and title of the person(s) collecting the evidence. c. A description of the electronic evidence provided by the opposing party. d. The media type and format on which the evidence is stored. e. All movement / handling of the electronic evidence, including (i) the people responsible for storing and/or browsing the evidence, (ii) the locations in which the evidence is stored, and (iii) the purpose behind the movement of the evidence. f. Date and time of check-in and check-out of the media on which the evidence is stored. Generally, electronic evidence will be admitted if it can be shown that the evidence is authentic, and either not hearsay or eligible for a hearsay exception Prepare an IT employee to be a Rule 30(b)(6) witness. 9. Schedule a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition early in the case to determine the opposing party s infrastructure, procedures, and the scope of electronic information possessed by the opposing party. 10. Consider expedited discovery pursuant to Rule 26(d). 2 Remember: Under ordinary circumstances, a party can not seek discovery of any evidence until after the Rule 26(f) conference, which is held at least 21 days before the scheduling conference or 21 days before an order is due pursuant to Rule 16(b). Rule 16(b) provides that orders are due within 120 days of the filing of the complaint. Translation: You might not be able to get e-discovery until almost 3 months after the complaint is filed. Expedited discovery can prevent the loss of electronic evidence. Upon the conclusion of the litigation, and provided that all appeals / post-trial procedures have been concluded with finality, document retention / destruction procedures should promptly commence (or re-commence, as the case may be). Do not assume that such procedures will automatically resume follow-up to ensure that retention policies are enforced. 1 See Kupper v. State, 2004 WLL (Tex. Ct. App. Jan. 14, 2004). In Kupper, the defendant argued that electronic evidence used against him at trial should have been excluded on chain of custody grounds. The Kupper Court rejected the defendant s argument, and concluded that the testimony established that the appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics, taken in conjunction with the circumstances, authenticated the evidence in question. 2 To obtain expedited discovery, a movant must show that reasonable grounds exist to believe that the opposing party is destroying, or will destroy, relevant electronic evidence, and that such destruction will irreparable harm the movant. While expert testimony is not a prerequisite to expedited discovery, such testimony dramatically increases the odds that a request for expedited discovery will be granted. Page 7 of 7
E-Discovery. Help or Hindrance? NEW FEDERAL RULES ON
BY DAWN M. BERGIN NEW FEDERAL RULES ON E-Discovery Help or Hindrance? E lectronic information is changing the litigation landscape. It is increasing the cost of litigation, consuming increasing amounts
More informationDocument Analysis Technology Group (DATG) and Records Management Alert
February 2007 Authors: Carolyn M. Branthoover +1.412.355.5902 carolyn.branthoover@klgates.com Karen I. Marryshow +1.412.355.6379 karen.marryshow@klgates.com K&L Gates comprises approximately 1,400 lawyers
More informationELECTRONIC DISCOVERY BASICS. John K. Rubiner and Bonita D. Moore 1. I. Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Is Virtually Everything
ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY BASICS John K. Rubiner and Bonita D. Moore 1 I. Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Is Virtually Everything A. Emails B. Text messages and instant messenger conversations C. Computer
More informationLegal Ethics of Metadata or Mining for Data About Data
Legal Ethics of Metadata or Mining for Data About Data Peter L. Ostermiller Attorney at Law 239 South Fifth Street Suite 1800 Louisville, KY 40202 peterlo@ploesq.com www.ploesq.com Overview What is Metadata?
More informationCrafting the Winning Argument in Spoliation Cases: And the Dog Ate Our Documents Isn t It
Crafting the Winning Argument in Spoliation Cases: And the Dog Ate Our Documents Isn t It Janelle L. Davis Thompson & Knight LLP 1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500 Dallas, Texas 75201 (214) 969-1677 Janelle.Davis@tklaw.com
More informationPRACTICE DIRECTION [ ] DISCLOSURE PILOT FOR THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS
Draft at 2.11.17 PRACTICE DIRECTION [ ] DISCLOSURE PILOT FOR THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS 1. General 1.1 This Practice Direction is made under Part 51 and provides a pilot scheme for disclosure in
More informationBy Kevin M. Smith and John Gregory Robinson. Reprinted by permission of Connecticut Lawyer. 16 Connecticut Lawyer July 2011 Visit
By Kevin M. Smith and John Gregory Robinson Reprinted by permission of Connecticut Lawyer 16 Connecticut Lawyer July 2011 Visit www.ctbar.org Lawyers seeking guidance on electronic discovery will find
More informationALI-ABA Course of Study Mass Litigation May 29-31, 2008 Charleston, South Carolina. Materials on Electronic Discovery
359 ALI-ABA Course of Study Mass Litigation May 29-31, 2008 Charleston, South Carolina Materials on Electronic Discovery By Shira A. Scheindlin Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse New York, New York
More informationPreservation, Spoliation, and Adverse Inferences a view from the Southern District of Texas
APRIL 19, 2010 Preservation, Spoliation, and Adverse Inferences a view from the Southern District of Texas By Jonathan Redgrave and Amanda Vaccaro In January, Judge Shira Scheindlin provided substantive
More informationINFORMATION MANAGEMENT:
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT: As cases become more complex and as e-documents abound, how can lawyers, experts and clients, meet the opportunities and challenges of electronic data management? Q. We have your
More informationTHE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE FOR THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS Opinion No April 2013
THE PROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE FOR THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS Opinion No. 627 April 2013 QUESTION PRESENTED Under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, what are the responsibilities of a
More informationCase 2:05-cv CNC Document 119 Filed 07/13/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No.
Case 2:05-cv-00467-CNC Document 119 Filed 07/13/2006 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN INDIA BREWING, INC., Plaintiff, v. Case No. 05-C-0467 MILLER BREWING CO., Defendant.
More informationThe SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, fabricating, or destroying of evidence relevant
What is it? The SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, fabricating, or destroying of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding. When Spoliation has
More informationR in a Nutshell by Mark Meltzer and John W. Rogers
R-17-0010 in a Nutshell by Mark Meltzer and John W. Rogers R-17-0010 was a rule petition filed by the Supreme Court s Committee on Civil Justice Reform in January 2017. The Supreme Court s Order in R-17-0010,
More informationInquiry From Discovery Subcommittee On Civil Rules Regarding Electronic Discovery
April 28, 2003 Peter McCabe Secretary, Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure Federal Judiciary Building Washington, D.C. 20544 Re: Inquiry From Discovery Subcommittee On Civil Rules Regarding Electronic
More informationAn Orbit Around Pension Committee
An Orbit Around Pension Committee In this Issue Factual Background...1 Preservation Deconstructed...2 Defining Relevance...3 Application to the Facts...4 Key Takeaways...5 In the second issue of Seyfarth
More informationBest Practices for Preservation of ESI John Rosenthal
Best Practices for Preservation of ESI John Rosenthal November 16, 2016 John Rosenthal Partner Washington, D.C. Antitrust and commercial litigator Chair, Winston E-Discovery & Information Governance Group
More informationIssued: March 30, 2017 Responsible Official: General Counsel Responsible Office: Office of Legal Affairs. Policy Statement
Page 1 Austin Peay State University Litigation Hold Notice POLICIES Issued: March 30, 2017 Responsible Official: General Counsel Responsible Office: Office of Legal Affairs Policy Statement The University
More informationOe Overview Federal Developments New rules for Electronically Stored Information (ESI) effective 12/1/06 ESI rules as applied State Law Developments P
New Challenges to CIOs in ediscovery and Electronic Records Management Presented by: Thomas Greene Special Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 1 Oe Overview Federal Developments New
More informationRecord Retention Program Overview
Business/Employee Record Retention and Production: Strategies for Effective and Efficient Record Retention Business & Commercial Litigation Seminar Peoria, Illinois January 17, 2013 Presented by: Brad
More informationUNITED STATES [DISTRICT/BANKRUPTCY] COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DIVISION., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. ), ) Judge ) Defendant.
UNITED STATES [DISTRICT/BANKRUPTCY] COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DIVISION, Plaintiff, vs. Case No., Judge Defendant. [PROPOSED] STANDING ORDER RELATING TO THE DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION
More informationCase 1:09-cv BMC Document 19 Filed 12/31/09 Page 1 of 5. Plaintiff, : :
Case 109-cv-02672-BMC Document 19 Filed 12/31/09 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------- X CHRIS VAGENOS, Plaintiff,
More informationFunctional Schedules for North Carolina State Agencies
Functional Schedules for North Carolina State Agencies Functional Schedules In 2015, the Records Analysis Unit of the Government Records Section at the State Archives of North Carolina (SANC) began a project
More informationRecords & Information Management Best Practices for the 21st Century
ATL ARMA RIM 101/201 Spring Seminar Records & Information Management Best Practices for the 21st Century May 6, 2015 Corporate Counsel Opposing Counsel Information Request Silver Bullet Litigation
More informationLITIGATION HOLDS: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Litigation Holds: Past, Present and Future Directions JDFSL V10N1 LITIGATION HOLDS: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Milton Luoma Metropolitan State University St. Paul, Minnesota Vicki M. Luoma Minnesota
More informationSpoliation Scrutiny: Disparate Standards For Distinct Mediums
Spoliation Scrutiny: Disparate Standards For Distinct Mediums By Robin Shah (December 21, 2017, 5:07 PM EST) On Dec. 1, 2015, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) was amended with the intent of providing
More informationCOMMENTARY. The New Texas Two-Step: Texas Supreme Court Articulates Evidence Spoliation Framework. Case Background
August 2014 COMMENTARY The New Texas Two-Step: Texas Supreme Court Articulates Evidence Spoliation Framework Spoliation of evidence has, for some time, remained an important topic relating to the discovery
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT LAW DIVISION JUDGE RAYMOND W. MITCHELL STANDING ORDER.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT LAW DIVISION JUDGE RAYMOND W. MITCHELL STANDING ORDER March 29, 2012 This Standing Order supercedes all prior Standing Orders regarding pending
More informationThe Pension Committee Revisited One Year Later
The Pension Committee Revisited One Year Later Welcome and Introductions Brad Harris Vice President of Legal Products, Zapproved Numerous white papers, articles and presentations on legal hold best practices
More informationCase3:12-cv SI Document11 Filed07/13/12 Page1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 SHUTTERFLY, INC., v. Plaintiff, FOREVERARTS, INC. and HENRY ZHENG, Defendants. / No. CR - SI ORDER
More informationBackground The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopted in 1938 encouraged full pre-trial disclosure (ream or reams of paper). Present day litigation
EVIDENCE AND DISCOVERY UPDATE Alistair B. Dawson 1 Background The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure adopted in 1938 encouraged full pre-trial disclosure (ream or reams of paper). Present day litigation
More informationVermont Bar Association 55 th Mid-Year Meeting
Vermont Bar Association 55 th Mid-Year Meeting Seminar Materials This Program Brought to You by the Letter E : Electronically Stored Information in the Small to Medium Lawsuit, Part 1 Faculty: James E.
More informationIn , Judge Scheindlin almost single-handedly put e-discovery
Alvin F. Lindsay and Allison C. Stanton Judges rarely, if ever, title their opinions as an author would title a book. When Federal District Judge Shira Scheindlin of the Southern District of New York titles
More informationCase 5:13-cv CAR Document 69 Filed 11/02/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
Case 5:13-cv-00338-CAR Document 69 Filed 11/02/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION RICK WEST, : : Plaintiff, : v. : : No. 5:13 cv 338 (CAR)
More informationSUPPLIER DATA PROCESSING AGREEMENT
SUPPLIER DATA PROCESSING AGREEMENT This Data Protection Agreement ("Agreement"), dated ("Agreement Effective Date") forms part of the ("Principal Agreement") between: [Company name] (hereinafter referred
More informationPiling On: Unresolved Issues Regarding Voluminous Discovery in Complex Criminal Cases in Federal Court
Piling On: Unresolved Issues Regarding Voluminous Discovery in Complex Criminal Cases in Federal Court By: Nina Marino and Reed Grantham KAPLAN MARINO, PC Beverly Hills, CA I. Introduction Federal criminal
More informationCase 5:16-cv CAR Document 19 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION
Case 5:16-cv-00435-CAR Document 19 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION Flint Riverkeeper, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationZubulake Judge Defines Discovery Duties and Spoliation Negligence Standards. January 29, 2010
Zubulake Judge Defines Discovery Duties and Spoliation Negligence Standards January 29, 2010 In an amended order subheaded Zubulake Revisited: Six Years Later, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin (SDNY), author
More informationInternational Arbitration
c International Arbitration F U L B R I G H T A L E R T October 3, 2008 Visit Practice Site Protocol for E-Disclosure in Arbitration Issued Subscribe by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Contact Us
More informationDon t Get Burned: Proper Implementation of the Litigation Hold Process is Your Best SPF (Spoliation Protection Factor)
Don t Get Burned: Proper Implementation of the Litigation Hold Process is Your Best SPF (Spoliation Protection Factor) November 7, 2007 Susan Westover and Denah Hoard California State University Office
More information7th CIRCUIT ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY COMMITTEE PRINCIPLES RELATING TO THE DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION. Second Edition, January, 2018
General Principles Principle 1.01 (Purpose) 7th CIRCUIT ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY COMMITTEE PRINCIPLES RELATING TO THE DISCOVERY OF ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION Second Edition, January, 2018 The purpose
More informationLitigation Hold Basics
We Power Life SM Litigation Hold Basics Allyson K. Howie Managing Counsel, Information Governance Entergy Legal Department October 12, 2017 The meaning of the word HOLD 2 Whatis a Litigation Hold? A legal
More informationMISSISSIPPI MODEL PUBLIC RECORDS RULES with comment
Rule No. MISSISSIPPI MODEL PUBLIC RECORDS RULES with comment Adopted: March 5, 2010 Table of Contents Page No. INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS...2 Statutory authority and purpose...2 Format of model rules...3 Model
More informationINTERPLAY OF DISCOVERY AND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
INTERPLAY OF DISCOVERY AND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT LYNDA A. PETERS CITY PROSECUTOR KAREN M. COPPA CHIEF ASSISTANT CORPORATION COUNSEL CITY OF CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF LAW LEGAL INFORMATION, INVESTIGATIONS,
More informationCase 1:14-cv FB-RLM Document 492 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 13817
Case 1:14-cv-04717-FB-RLM Document 492 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 13817 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------x
More informationOctober s Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery
OCTOBER 20, 2015 October s Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery This Sidley Update addresses the following recent developments and court decisions involving e-discovery issues: 1. A Sixth Circuit ruling
More informationA Real Safe Harbor: The Long-Awaited Proposed FRCP Rule 37(e), Its Workings, and Its Guidance for ESI Preservation
BY JAMES S. KURZ DANIEL D. MAULER A Real Safe Harbor: The Long-Awaited Proposed FRCP Rule 37(e), Its Workings, and Its Guidance for ESI Preservation New Rule 37(e) is expected to go into effect Dec. 1
More informationSpoliation: New Law, New Dangers. ABA National Legal Malpractice Conference
Spoliation: New Law, New Dangers ABA National Legal Malpractice Conference Speakers Ronald C. Minkoff Partner Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC New York, NY Heather K. Kelly Partner Gordon & Rees, LLP Denver,
More informationCase 2:03-cv MJP Document 285 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 1 of 9
Case :0-cv-0-MJP Document Filed 0/0/0 Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 MAURICIO LEON, Plaintiff, v. IDX SYSTEMS CORPORATION et al., Defendants. No. C0-P
More informationKING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC RECORDS DISCLOSURE POLICY
KING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY PUBLIC RECORDS DISCLOSURE POLICY 1. PURPOSE: 1.1 Public Records Act: The Public Records Act, chapter 42.56 RCW, requires the King County Housing Authority ( KCHA ) to make
More informationCOMPREHENSIVE JAMS COMPREHENSIVE ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES
COMPREHENSIVE JAMS COMPREHENSIVE ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES Effective October 1, 2010 JAMS COMPREHENSIVE ARBITRATION RULES & PROCEDURES JAMS provides arbitration and mediation services from Resolution
More informationediscovery Demystified
ediscovery Demystified Presented by: Robin E. Stewart Of Counsel Kansas City Robin.Stewart@KutakRock.com (816) 960-0090 Why Kutak Rock s ediscovery Practice Exists Every case, regardless of size, has an
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/03/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/03/2015. ExhibitA
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/03/2015 06:04 PM INDEX NO. 650312/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/03/2015 ExhibitA SUPREMECOURTOFTHESTATEOFNEW YORK COUNTYOFNEW YORK BANK HAPOALIM B.M., vs.
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT CHANCERY DIVISION CALENDAR 7 COURTROOM 2405 JUDGE DIANE J. LARSEN STANDING ORDER 2.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT CHANCERY DIVISION Chambers Telephone: 312-603-3343 Courtroom Clerk: Phil Amato Law Clerks: Azar Alexander & Andrew Sarros CALENDAR 7 COURTROOM
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION. v. Civil No. 6:08-cv-144-LED-JDL
REALTIME DATA, LLC d/b/a IXO v. PACKETEER, INC. et al Doc. 742 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION REALTIME DATA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. 6:08-cv-144-LED-JDL
More information2017 All-Ohio Legal Forum. Succession Planning: What You Need to Know to Appoint a Successor Attorney for Your Practice
2017 All-Ohio Legal Forum Succession Planning: What You Need to Know to Appoint a Successor Attorney for Your Practice 1.0 Professional Conduct Hour August 23 August 25, 2017 Cleveland Speaker Biographies
More informationWHAT TO DO TO START PREPARING FOR DISCOVERY
Managing the Early Stages of Commercial Litigation: Critical First Steps WHAT TO DO TO START PREPARING FOR DISCOVERY Michael Feagley, Partner 312.701.7065 mfeagley@mayerbrown.com Terri Mazur, Partner 212.506.2680
More informationBrookshire Brothers, LTD. v. Aldridge, ---S.W.3d----, 2014 WL (Tex. July 3, 2014)
Brookshire Brothers, LTD. v. Aldridge, ---S.W.3d----, 2014 WL 2994435 (Tex. July 3, 2014) 1 Chronology of events 9/2/2004 DOI slip and fall 6/26/2008 Judgment signed by trial court 9/11/2008 Notice of
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/24/ :19 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 20 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/24/2016
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/24/2016 02:19 PM INDEX NO. 653478/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 20 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/24/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------)(
More informationNAPD Formal Ethics Opinion 16-1
NAPD Formal Ethics Opinion 16-1 Question: The Ethics Counselors of the National Association for Public Defense (NAPD) have been asked to address the following scenario: An investigator working for Defense
More informationCIVIL DIVISION I PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION I PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA SECTION 1 PHILOSOPHY, SCOPE AND GOALS 1.1 - Citation to Procedures 1.2 - Purpose and Scope
More informationCase 4:16-cv Document 80 Filed in TXSD on 08/30/18 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:16-cv-03577 Document 80 Filed in TXSD on 08/30/18 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 64 Filed: 08/25/15 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:873
Case: 1:15-cv-00924 Document #: 64 Filed: 08/25/15 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:873 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION STEVEN SALAITA, Plaintiff, v. CHRISTOPHER
More informationDisclosure of documents in civil proceedings in England and Wales
Disclosure of documents in civil proceedings in England and Wales October 2017 Contents Disclosure 1 Purpose of this note 1 Disclosable documents 1 Control 2 Preservation of documents 3 Duty to search
More informationASSERTING, CONTESTING, AND PRESERVING PRIVILEGES UNDER THE NEW RULES OF DISCOVERY
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON LAW FOUNDATION CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION ADVANCED CIVIL DISCOVERY UNDER THE NEW RULES June 1-2, 2000 Dallas, Texas June 8-9, 2000 Houston, Texas ASSERTING, CONTESTING, AND PRESERVING
More informationCOMPLEX BUSINESS LITIGATION DIVISION PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
COMPLEX BUSINESS LITIGATION DIVISION PROCEDURES FOR THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT, IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA SECTION 1 PHILOSOPHY, SCOPE AND GOALS 1.1 - Citation to Procedure 1.2
More informationE Discovery in Employment Litigation Identifying, Preserving, Collecting and Producing Electronically Stored Information
Presenting a live 90 minute webinar with interactive Q&A E Discovery in Employment Litigation Identifying, Preserving, Collecting and Producing Electronically Stored Information WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2013
More informationRULES OF EVIDENCE LEGAL STANDARDS
RULES OF EVIDENCE LEGAL STANDARDS Digital evidence or electronic evidence is any probative information stored or transmitted in digital form that a party to a court case may use at trial. The use of digital
More informationNew legal stuff that I/T folks need to know about
Review of the Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure that address electronic documents & ediscovery and a discussion about the potential impact on I/T operations or New legal stuff
More informationSubstantial new amendments to the Federal
The 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: What Changed and How the Changes Might Affect Your Practice by Rachel A. Hedley, Giles M. Schanen, Jr. and Jennifer Jokerst 1 ARTICLE Substantial
More information9:30 a.m. MOTION CALL, CASE MANAGEMENT, STATUS DATES 10:00 a.m. 2:30 p.m. MATTERS SET BY THE COURT
HONORABLE FRANKLIN U. VALDERRAMA STANDING ORDER CALENDAR 3 Room 2402, Richard J. Daley Center Telephone: 312-603-5432 No Fax or Email Law Clerks: Alexandra M. Franco Samantha Grund-Wickramasekera Court
More informationDOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND E-DISCOVERY IN CLASS ACTIONS Avoiding The Spoliation Trap. Matthew P. McGuire 1
DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND E-DISCOVERY IN CLASS ACTIONS Avoiding The Spoliation Trap Matthew P. McGuire 1 Getting served with a class action complaint presents a number of daunting challenges for a corporate
More informationElectronic Discovery Best Practices. Virginia Llewellyn *
Electronic Discovery Best Practices Virginia Llewellyn * Cite as: Virginia Llewellyn, Electronic Discovery Best Practices, 10 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 51 (2004), at http://law.richmond.edu/ jolt/v10i5/article51.pdf.
More informationDiscovery Requests in Trademark Cases Under U.S. Law
Discovery Requests in Trademark Cases Under U.S. Law Michael Grow Arent Fox LLP, Washington D.C., United States Summary and Outline Parties to civil actions or inter partes proceedings before the United
More informationCase 5:15-cv HRL Document 88 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-hrl Document Filed 0/0/ Page of E-filed 0//0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 FIRST FINANCIAL SECURITY, INC., Plaintiff, v. FREEDOM EQUITY GROUP, LLC, Defendant.
More informationJUDICIARY OF GUAM ELECTRONIC FILING RULES 1
1 1 Adopted by the Supreme Court of Guam pursuant to Promulgation Order No. 15-001-01 (Oct. 2, 2015). TABLE OF CONTENTS DIVISION I - AUTHORITY AND SCOPE Page EFR 1.1. Electronic Document Management System.
More informationJune s Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery
JUNE 22, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE June s Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery This Sidley Update addresses the following recent developments and court decisions involving e-discovery issues: 1. A Southern
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATENT CASE SCHEDULE. Answer or Other Response to Complaint 5 weeks
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATENT CASE SCHEDULE Event Service of Complaint Scheduled Time Total Time After Complaint Answer or Other Response to Complaint 5 weeks Initial
More informationAnnex 1: Standard Contractual Clauses (processors)
Annex 1: Standard Contractual Clauses (processors) For the purposes of Article 26(2) of Directive 95/46/EC for the transfer of personal data to processors established in third countries which do not ensure
More informationGUIDELINE DISCOVERY AND LEGAL HOLD
Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Office of the Chief Information Officer GUIDELINE DISCOVERY AND LEGAL HOLD Guideline (Definition): OCIO Guidelines derive from Information Management and Protection
More informationIndividuals and organizations have long struggled to efficiently
small_frog/e+/getty Images Non-Party Responses to Preservation Demands Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 45 sets out the rules that parties must follow when issuing or responding to a subpoena in
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
AO 88B (Rev. 06/09 Subpoena to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Eastern District of of Michigan AETNA
More informationA BILL. (a) the owner of the device and/or geolocation information; or. (c) a person to whose geolocation the information pertains.
A BILL To amend title 18, United States Code, to specify the circumstances in which law enforcement may acquire, use, and keep geolocation information. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives
More informationSEARCH AND SEIZURE OF DIGITAL EVIDENCE: THRESHOLDS AND MINEFIELDS
PAPER: SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF DIGITAL EVIDENCE: THRESHOLDS AND MINEFIELDS By Justice J. E. (Ted) Scanlan, Justice of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia and Deputy Judge of the Nunavut Court of Justice Discovery
More informationDOCUMENT RETENTION ISSUES FOR IN- HOUSE COUNSEL
DOCUMENT RETENTION ISSUES FOR IN- HOUSE COUNSEL Rebecca A. Brommel BrownWinick 666 Grand Avenue, Suite 2000 Des Moines, IA 50309-2510 Telephone: 515-242-2452 Facsimile: 515-323-8552 E-mail: brommel@brownwinick.com
More informationThe 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
The 2015 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Boston Bar Association Commercial and Business Litigation Section December 7, 2015 Paula M. Bagger, Cooke Clancy & Gruenthal LLP Gregory S. Bombard,
More informationUnited States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. APPLIED TELEMATICS, INC. v. SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P. No. Civ.A Sept. 17, 1996.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. APPLIED TELEMATICS, INC. v. SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P. No. Civ.A. 94-4603. Sept. 17, 1996. MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RUETER, Magistrate J. Presently
More informationCommercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes)
Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes) Rules Amended and Effective October 1, 2013 Fee Schedule Amended and Effective June 1,
More informationWhat Not To Do When Served With A Rule 45 Subpoena In The Age of E-Discovery
What Not To Do When Served With A Rule 45 Subpoena In The Age of E-Discovery Monica McCarroll Don t let it become a case of too little too late. Monica McCarroll focuses her practice on commercial litigation,
More informationBest Practices in Litigation Holds and Document Preservation. Presented by AABANY Litigation Committee
Best Practices in Litigation Holds and Document Preservation Presented by 2017-18 AABANY Litigation Committee Speakers Vince Chang Partner, Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch Connie Montoya Partner, Hinshaw & Culbertson
More informationAPPENDIX C M E M O R A N D U M FROM: Advance Authorization for Investigative, Expert or Other Services. Case Name & Designation.
APPENDIX C M E M O R A N D U M TO: Chief Judge (or Delegate) United States Court of Appeals For the Circuit DATE: FROM: SUBJECT: Advance Authorization for Investigative, Expert or Other Services It is
More informationCharter Township of Sandstone
Charter Township of Sandstone FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT PROCEDURES & GUIDELINES Statement of Principles It is the policy of the Charter Township of Sandstone that all persons, except those who are serving
More informationHONORABLE ANNA H. DEMACOPOULOS STANDING ORDER CALENDAR 13 ROOM
Law Clerks: Amanda Bacoyanis Jennifer Palmer Court s Schedule: HONORABLE ANNA H. DEMACOPOULOS STANDING ORDER CALENDAR 13 ROOM 2502 312-603-6008 CHANCERY.CALENDAR13@COOKCOUNTYIL.GOV 9:30 a.m. Case Management
More informationDeposition Survival Guide
Deposition Survival Guide Best Practices for In-House Counsel and Corporate Supervisors From Preservation of Corporate Documents to Corporate Depositions Presented by Just the Facts Company, Not So Bright,
More informationGENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2011 H 1 HOUSE BILL 380. Short Title: Amend RCP/Electronically Stored Information.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 0 H 1 HOUSE BILL 0 Short Title: Amend RCP/Electronically Stored Information. (Public) Sponsors: Representatives Glazier, T. Moore, Ross, and Jordan (Primary Sponsors).
More informationStanding Practice Order Pursuant to 20.1 of Act Establishing Rules Governing Practice and Procedure in Medical Assistance Provider Appeals
Standing Practice Order Pursuant to 20.1 of Act 2002-142 Establishing Rules Governing Practice and Procedure in Medical Assistance Provider Appeals TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I--PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS Subpart
More informationDepositions upon oral examination. A. When depositions may be taken. After commencement of the action, any party may take the testimony of any
1-030. Depositions upon oral examination. A. When depositions may be taken. After commencement of the action, any party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition upon oral
More informationUnsolicited Proposal Policy
Lower Colorado River Authority Unsolicited Proposal Policy Community Resources 1. APPLICABILITY. This policy applies to Unsolicited Proposals received by the Lower Colorado River Authority Community Resources
More informationBelton I.S.D. Records Management Policy and Procedural Manual. Compiled by: Record Management Committee
Belton I.S.D. Records Management Policy and Procedural Manual Compiled by: Record Management Committee Table of Contents I. Definitions and Purpose Pages 3-5 II. Roles and Responsibilities Pages 6-8 III.
More informationCase Theory and Themes. Preparing to Present Defense. Narrow Legal and Factual Issues
PREPARING FOR TRIAL Case Theory and Themes Preparing to Present Defense Narrow Legal and Factual Issues Trial Logistics Application of the law to the facts of the case. Basis for the legal reasons why
More information