Last month, Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse decided an issue that we likely will see more of in the age of big data.
Judge Grimm’s Revised Discovery Order Expands Definition of Proportionality, Includes Technology Assisted Review
We previously shared Judge Paul W. Grimm’s standard Discovery Order, which we recommend to state and federal court judges alike as a model and inspiration to manage the pretrial…
Ninth Circuit’s Judge Kozinski Takes Stand Against Anti-Consumer Wave of Change to Federal Civil Procedure
If you don’t think you can win fair and square, then change the rules. That’s been the modus operandi of the United States Chamber of Commerce (a private lobbying group with a misleading name) and the wealthy interests it represents, like the nation’s major insurance companies and product manufacturers.
Preservation is an ancient, well-established common law doctrine. Armory v. Delamirie, 1 Strange 505, 93 Eng. Rep. 664 (K.B.1722) (chimney sweep boy and the missing diamond); Goodman v. Praxair Services, Inc. 632 F.Supp.2d 494, (D.Md. 2009) (Grimm, J.).
In this case, Plaintiffs moved to compel answers to their questions about Defendants’ efforts to respond to Plaintiffs’ discovery requests, including what procedures were undertaken to search for responsive electronically stored information.
Earlier this week, members of the CBA’s Federal Practice Section were informed that the Initial Discovery Protocols in Employment Cases are now being used by all the judges in the district.
A court in the Southern District of Ohio recently ordered the defendants in a wrongful death case to answer interrogatories asking them to explain “what procedures or methods were used to search for responsive electronically stored information, or ESI,” and “what efforts they made to comply with plaintiffs’ previous discovery requests.”
As I noted months ago in my discussion of Instagram’s flip-flop on its terms of service related to selling user photos, we love our online services, but do not like when they change the rules about what they will and will not do with our private information.
Last week, the Supreme Court of Texas heard oral arguments on whether a party can use a pre-suit deposition to identify an anonymous blogger. The petitioner tried to use a pre-suit subpoena to force Google to identify a blogger that constantly railed on how bad the company and its owner was.
Plaintiff sought an ex parte temporary restraining order requiring Defendants to disable their website and remove information related to allegedly infringing software and also sought to create a forensic image of one defendant’s hard drive(s) to ensure preservation.