Newsfeed – E-Discovery – Law – Technology
Lost Hard Drives in the Mail: An e-Discovery Nightmare Thursday, 2 September 2010
The facts sound like a typical e-Discovery case, but quickly you feel very sick.
Two employees were accused of misappropriation of trade secrets. A Federal lawsuit was filed in Florida. As one can guess, electronically stored information would be key evidence in the lawsuit. Dana Ltd. v. Am. Axle & Mfg. Holdings, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88474 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 26, 2010).
The Plaintiffs retained an expert and shipped the computer hard drives for forensic examination to Michigan and forwarded them onto their Florida office.
The hard drives went missing sometime after they were shipped. Dana Ltd., at *2-3.
The Plaintiffs filed four subpoenas duces tecum to be issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against their own expert’s firm. Dana Ltd., at *3.
Three days before the depositions, the expert’s attorneys filed a motion to quash or modify the subpoenas in Federal Court in Michigan, because the expert was going to be out of the state on the designated deposition date. Dana Ltd., at *3-4.
The Court attempted to contact the moving party’s attorneys to see if motion practice could be avoided, only to learn that both attorneys left the state. As the Court noted, “It ill-behooves an attorney to ask the court to drop everything to attend an eleventh-hour request for relief and then leave town.” Dana Ltd., at *4.
The Court addressed the motion without a hearing, given the unavailability of counsel.
The Court stated it would be exceeding its authority to quash a subpoena issued by the Federal Court in Florida. In short, the motion was filed in the wrong Federal Court. Dana Ltd., at *4-5.
Bow Tie Thoughts
The idea of hard drives being lost in the mail sends fear into attorneys and service providers alike. A shipping accident can happen to anyone. Moreover, sending hard drives is a common practice, because sending evidence via a personal courier across the country is often not practical, unless there is truly highly sensitive material.
A possible best practice is to have the vendor to make a copy before shipping any data. Alternatively, if multiple hard drives are being shipped, they can be sent separately and staggered out over several days. This can help ensure if there is a shipping problem, not all the data is lost.
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | bowtielaw
Lost Hard Drives in the Mail: An e-Discovery Nightmare Thursday, 2 September 2010
The facts sound like a typical e-Discovery case, but quickly you feel very sick.Two employees were accused of misappropriation of trade secrets. A Federal lawsuit was filed in Florida. As one can guess, electronically stored information would be key evidence in the lawsuit. Dana Ltd. v. Am. Axle & Mfg. Holdings, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88474 (W.D. Mich. Aug. 26, 2010).The Plaintiffs retained an expert and shipped the computer hard drives for forensic examination to Michigan and forwarded them onto their Florida office.
The hard drives went missing sometime after they were shipped. Dana Ltd., at *2-3.
The Plaintiffs filed four subpoenas duces tecum to be issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against their own expert’s firm. Dana Ltd., at *3.
Three days before the depositions, the expert’s attorneys filed a motion to quash or modify the subpoenas in Federal Court in Michigan, because the expert was going to be out of the state on the designated deposition date. Dana Ltd., at *3-4.The Court attempted to contact the moving party’s attorneys to see if motion practice could be avoided, only to learn that both attorneys left the state. As the Court noted, “It ill-behooves an attorney to ask the court to drop everything to attend an eleventh-hour request for relief and then leave town.” Dana Ltd., at *4.The Court addressed the motion without a hearing, given the unavailability of counsel.The Court stated it would be exceeding its authority to quash a subpoena issued by the Federal Court in Florida. In short, the motion was filed in the wrong Federal Court. Dana Ltd., at *4-5.Bow Tie ThoughtsThe idea of hard drives being lost in the mail sends fear into attorneys and service providers alike. A shipping accident can happen to anyone. Moreover, sending hard drives is a common practice, because sending evidence via a personal courier across the country is often not practical, unless there is truly highly sensitive material.A possible best practice is to have the vendor to make a copy before shipping any data. Alternatively, if multiple hard drives are being shipped, they can be sent separately and staggered out over several days. This can help ensure if there is a shipping problem, not all the data is lost. Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | eDJ Syndicator
e-Evidence Insights: Paris Las Vegas Thursday, 2 September 2010
I'm making this another category. First of all, let me tell you that personally, I found evidence - whether civil or criminal - to be one of the most fascinating subjects in law school. It was also one of the most complex. As much as I wanted to get my JD and become an attorney, the problem was that I was in my 40s by the time I took evidence class. That means, I'd had 40 years to think like a layman; re-programming to think like a lawyer was no mean feat.
But, as eDiscovery professionals, I can't think of anything more important to our clients than how we handle evidence. It's the basis of everything we do, and not just the collection and processing of it. There's chain-of-custody, authentication, contamination, etc. I'm not just referring to physically handling the stuff, I'm referring to how the appropriate professionals should have in their mind a methodology for handling it even before it exists. One false move and this opens the door to impeachment.
So, it is with great fanfare that I reveal that Paris Hilton has finally made it; to this blog, that is! Why? Because of how, as a layman, she handled her arrest for cocaine possession. Not since OJ Simpson and his "ugly-ass" Bruno Magli shoes has someone - figuratively, this time - put their foot so firmly in their mouth; and in doing so, provided us with another outstanding example of how a bunch of seemingly-unrelated statements, photos and social networking posts may ultimately do her in.
Paris claimed - initially - that the Chanel purse wasn't hers. What contrary evidence is out there? Her Twitter post with a snapshot of the identical Chanel purse, exclaiming how happy she is with "my" new purse. Does this definitively prove it's the same purse? No; when it comes to criminal proceedings, nothing is that simple - nor should it be when someone's liberty is at stake. However, if she's convicted, Twitter, TMZ and Radar Online may deserve the lion's share of the credit.
[This story changes by the minute, but the latest appears to be that Paris now admits it was her purse, but the coke wasn't. Oy...]
Don't ever tell me that "all publicity is good publicity" and expect me to agree with you...I defer to Miranda and the 5th Amendment. I - and I suspect Ms. Hilton's criminal defense attorney - wish people would exercise their right to silence more often...
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Perry L. Segal
Proportionality – Why Wait? Thursday, 2 September 2010
Proportionality in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is quite clear and lucid:
On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount
continue…
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Mary Mack
Proportionality – Why Wait? Thursday, 2 September 2010
Proportionality in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is quite clear and lucid:On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amountcontinue…
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | eDJ Syndicator
Proportionality – Why Wait? Thursday, 2 September 2010
Proportionality in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is quite clear and lucid:
On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount
continue…
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Mary Mack
301 - Décès de Jean-Pierre Wallot Thursday, 2 September 2010
J'ai connu Monsieur Wallot plus particulièrement dans le cadre de l'organisation du Congrès international des archives de Montréal en 1992 dont je faisais partie. En tant que Québécois, il avait particulièrement oeuvré pour que ce congrès qui réunissait plusieurs centaines d'archivistes du monde ait lieu au Québec.
Je garde un excellent souvenir des séances de travail avec lui et toute l'équipe, dont Robert Garon alors Conservateur des Archives nationales du Québec.
Michel Roberge
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Michel Roberge<br>Conseiller principal <br>en gestion intégrée des documents (GID)
The Carmel Valley eDiscovery Retreat Thursday, 2 September 2010
The Carmel Valley eDiscovery Retreat will be a premier resource for industry practitioners who wish to focus on the complexities and practicalities of eDiscovery. Whether you’re new to eDiscovery, or want to increase your existing expertise, the retreat will allow you to explore this critical topic with established industry leaders and your peers - all in one of the most stunningly beautiful areas of the United States, Carmel, California. Earn CLE credit hours while you get away from the hustle and bustle of the daily grind in one of California’s most pristine destinations.Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | eDJ Syndicator
Intermountain EDiscovery Conference: Sep. 24 in Salt Lake City Thursday, 2 September 2010
John and I are both excited to be lecturing at the Intermountain eDiscovery Conference. If you haven't heard about it, it is organized by Orange Legal Technologies and Fabian & Clendenin. The conference will be held on September 24th in Salt Lake City.
It is very inexpensive - $50. Gotta love that price, and it even includes lunch. Speakers include:
• Ryan G. Baker – Partner, Baker Marquart Crone & Hawxhurst
• Daniel S. Day – Senior Attorney, Litigation, SUPERVALU Inc.
• Michael I. Katz – Partner, Thomas Whitelaw
• Sharon D. Nelson, Esq. – President, Sensei Enterprises (Social Media and eDiscovery)
• Tom O’Connor – Director, Gulf Coast Legal Technology Center
• Rudy Perrino – Partner, Fulbright & Jaworksi L.L.P.
• John W. Simek – Vice President, Sensei Enterprises (Computer Forensics and eDiscovery)
• Mark L. Smith – Associate, Winston & Strawn
eDiscovery topics include:
• Social Media and Electronic Discovery: Riches and Risks (this is the one John and I are presenting)
• The Challenge and Benefit of Integrating IT into Electronic Discovery
• The Continued Emergence of Early Case Assessment
• Considering eDiscovery? Time, Cost and Risk Considerations
• Best Practices: Complex Discovery in Corporations and Law Firms
• Metadata: What It Is, Why It Is Important, and Why You Should Care
• Organizing and Managing Large Document Reviews
• eDiscovery 101 – An Overview of eDiscovery
We're looking forward to seeing our old friend Tom O'Connor who spends altogether too much time having fun in New Orleans.
It should be an excellent conference - if you'll be attending, please stop by and say hello.
E-mail: snelson@senseient.com Phone: 703-359-0700
http://twitter.com/sharonnelsonesq
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Sharon D. Nelson, Esq.
Cost Shifting and Fee Splitting in Electronic Discovery Thursday, 2 September 2010
Listen to Karl Schieneman, Director of Analytics and Review with JurInnov talk about how cost shifting and cost collaboration are occurring in electronic discovery. We have an outstanding panel for today’s show as the Honorable James C. Francis, IV, a magistrate Judge from the S.D. of NY, Robert W. Trenchard, the chair of Wilmer Hale’s E-Discovery Committee, and Megan Jones a nationally recognized electronic expert from Hausfeld, LLP who represents claimants in antitrust litigation discuss trends that involve cost shifting. Today’s show talks about the mechanics of cost shifting but we also delve into how new technologies such as concept searching can be addressed in meet and confers to reduce costs. Given the different perspectives, a variety of opinions will be shared including how important the Proclamation Collaboration can be to reducing cost shifting arguments to real disputes. Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | eDJ Syndicator
Iowa Law School Offers Free Internet Course on Health Care Reform Law Thursday, 2 September 2010
One area we have tried to cover at The Posse List is heathcare for contract attorneys. The new health care law makes sweeping changes to our nation’s health care system. Many provisions will have a significant impact upon employers and their employees. While many of the changes are phased in gradually over the next eight years, many changes take effect this year. Our previous posts on the subject can be found by clicking here.
1. If you have done any research on the legislation and you have some thoughts on these issues as they affect contract attorneys, email us and include any links you have found helpful/informative.
3. Many agencies offer some kind of insurance plan in which the temps may enroll, but the agencies usually don’t pay any of the premiums. Usually the candidate pays, and the cost is payroll-deducted. If your agency offers coverage – any kind of coverage - tell us about it and send us their plans and/or a web link.
4. If you have found good, affordable healthcare coverage outside the contract attorney world (bar association, trade association, whatever) tell us about it.
Please email us at heathcare@theposselist.com
We’ll post all the information we collect.
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | mrposse
Guidance Software Webcast: Featured Analyst Firm Discusses Bringing E ... - MarketWatch (press release) Thursday, 2 September 2010
Guidance Software Webcast: Featured Analyst Firm Discusses Bringing E ... MarketWatch (press release) Successful methods for bringing the e-discovery process in-house. -- Bringing the legal team and IT department together to execute a defensible process. ... Guidance Software Webcast: Featured Analyst Firm Discusses Bringing E ...TradersHuddle.com (press release) all 5 news articles » |
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | (author unknown)
The new age of compliance - CIO UK Thursday, 2 September 2010
The new age of compliance CIO UK ... counsel's opinion on what might be important content during an e-discovery exercise, organisations of all sizes should preserve their business records. ... and more » |
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | (author unknown)
Court Finds No Spoliation as to Documents Produced from Backup Tapes because "Documents Were Never in Fact Destroyed" Thursday, 2 September 2010
Pitney Bowes Gov. Solutions, Inc. v. United States, 2010 WL 3278402 (Fed. Cl. Aug. 19, 2010)In this post-award bid protest, plaintiff sought spoliation sanctions for defendant’s destruction of relevant documents. Although most of the documents were deleted and/or destroyed by their original custodians upon the order of the contracting officer, the documents were available for production from backup tapes. The restored documents, however, all reflected the same author in their metadata, causing plaintiff to doubt their veracity and persist in its request for spoliation sanctions.
To explain the altered metadata, defendant asserted that all of the documents at issue had, at one time, been sent to one employee as attachments to emails for the purpose of assisting her in drafting a related document. That employee had, in turn, saved each document to her desktop, thus altering the metadata to reflect a common author. There was no evidence the documents were otherwise altered.
Plaintiff argued that despite the ability to produce the materials requested, spoliation sanctions were nonetheless appropriate where employees had been ordered to delete documents and offered the analogy that if an employee attempted to burn documents but did not successfully burn them all, “sanctions for spoliation would be appropriate even if he did a bad job of carrying out the spoliation.” Defendant, in turn, argued that no spoliation had occurred because the documents were available from backup tapes.
Taking up its discussion, the court acknowledged that “it was error on the part of the contracting officer to order the destruction of the scoring sheets.” However, because of the availability of the backed up documents, the court determined that “[e]ssentially, there is no longer a question of spoliation because the documents were never in fact destroyed.” Further, the court denied plaintiff’s challenge to the veracity of the documents based on its analysis of the metadata absent any showing that the documents had been modified other than to save them to the email recipient’s hard drive.
To Continue Reading: Click Here
------------------------------------------
Source: ediscoverylaw.com
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | Jeffery Fehrman
Finding a Cost-Effective Solution For Lawsuits With EDiscovery – Boosh News (press release) (blog) Thursday, 2 September 2010
Finding a Cost-Effective Solution For Lawsuits With EDiscoveryBoosh News (press release) (blog)The use of electronic information or eDiscovery solutions has unraveled a promising future for the legal world. Large corporations engaged in legal battles ... |
Source: "Shared" via Dominic in Google Reader | eDJ Syndicator
My Google Profile Friday, 16 July 2010
Check out my new Google profile.Source: Dominic's shared items in Google Reader | (author unknown)
News by Email