This is part five of the continuing series on two-filter document culling. This is very important to successful, economical document review.
Over the past year, e-discovery issues have splashed the front pages of the newspapers even outside of the Court system.
Retired Magistrate Judge John Facciola was recently featured in an interview on Legal Talk Network’s Digital Detectives.
This is part four of the continuing series on two-filter document culling. Please read part one and part two and part three first. Hopefully you will like this part four sequel better than Harper Lee’s sequel.
In a previous post we discussed generally the idea of a cooperative discovery process and highlighted how the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules embrace this principal (see, e.g., proposed amendments to Federal Rule Civil Procedure [“FRCP”] 1).
And just like that, it’s the end of Bloomberg’s Big Law Business Summit.
There is a significant nexus between data privacy and security and e-discovery that grows more pronounced as the volume of data generated multiplies exponentially and the ability of e-discovery tools to collect and process that data grows increasingly sophisticated.
This is the inaugural post in Discovery Advocate’s new series, “Your First Five Questions,” in which we identify a question commonly (or sometimes not so commonly) seen in practice followed by the first five questions you might ask and why. Have a scenario you’d like us to address?
Most lawyers can easily recall a litigation scenario where a client’s past social media post, photo, or video caused more than a little consternation in both client and lawyer.