FRCP 26(f) Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries Ryann M. Buckman Electronic Discovery September 21, 2009 Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(f) and In re Bristol-Myers Squibb Securities Litigation Lina Carreras.

Advertisements

Electronic Discovery Guidelines Meet and Confer - General definition. a requirement of courts that before certain types of motions and/or petitions will.

Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co.

August 28, 2009 Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance Arbitration Process.

New Decade, New Rules: Discovery of Electronically Stored Information in Ontario 2010 and beyond May, 2010 Presentation by Clifford F. Shnier, JD President,

Qualcomm Incorporated, v. Broadcom Corporation.  U.S. Federal Court Rules of Civil Procedure – amended rules December 1, 2006 to include electronically.

Responding to Subpoenas Springfield Metropolitan Bar Association Doug Healy March 25, 2013.

© The McCoy Law Firm 2012 James McCoy The McCoy Law Firm Coit Rd., Ste. 560 Dallas, Texas (214)

1 As of April 2014 Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP)

E-Discovery New Rules of Civil Procedure Presented by Lucy Isaki January 23, 2007.

William P. Butterfield February 16, Part 1: Why Can’t We Cooperate?

Ethical Issues in Data Security Breach Cases Presented by Robert J. Scott Scott & Scott, LLP

Ethical Issues in the Electronic Age Ethical Issues in the Electronic Age Frost Brown Todd LLC Seminar May 24, 2007 Frost Brown.

E-Discovery LIMITS ON E-DISCOVERY. No New Preservation Rule When does duty to preserve attach? Reasonably anticipated litigation. Audio sanctions.

1 Best Practices in Legal Holds Effectively Managing the e-Discovery Process and Associated Costs.

Randy J. Cox.  Rule 6 – counting days  Rule 11 – adoption of federal rule  Rule 15 – amended pleadings  Rule 26 – no federal-court disclosure requirements;

Decided May 13, 2003 By the United States Court for the Southern District of New York.

1 Sixth National HIPAA Summit The Health Lawyer as Business Associate March 28, 2003 Session VI 3:00 pm Gerald E. DeLoss, Esquire Barnwell Whaley Patterson.

Ronald J. Hedges No Judge Left Behind: A Report Card on the E- Discovery Rules April 24, 2007 Austin, Texas National.

Electronic Discovery (eDiscovery) Chad Meyer & John Vyhlidal ConAgra Foods.

Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc. 250 F.R.D. 251 (D. Md. 2008)

Investigating & Preserving Evidence in Data Security Incidents Robert J. Scott Scott & Scott, LLP

Aguilar v. ICE Division of Homeland Security 255, F.R.D. 350 (S.D.N.Y 2008)

230 F.R.D. 640 (D. Kan. 2005).  Shirley Williams is a former employee of Sprint/United Management Co.  Her employment was terminated during a Reduction-in-

Perspectives on Discovery from an Attorney / Records Manager 3/15/2007 ©The Cadence Group, Inc Confidential & Proprietary Information is our Forté.

The Sedona Principles 1-7

Attorney-Client Privilege and Privacy Considerations Between US Corporations & Foreign Affiliates General Counsel Conference, Washington, D.C. October.

Discovery III Expert Witness Disclosure And Discovery Motions & Sanctions.

1 Agenda for 7th Class Admin –Slides –Name plates out Work Product Experts Introduction to Sanctions.

CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2005 SECTIONS C & F CLASS 24 DISCOVERY V.

E-Discovery: Understanding the 2006 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure amendments, continuing complaints, and speculation about more rule changes to come.

2009 CHANGES IN CALIFORNIA DISCOVERY RULES The California Electronic Discovery Act Batya Swenson E-discovery Task Force

August 28, 2009 Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance Arbitration Process.

Meet and Confer Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “parties must confer as soon as practicable - and in any event at least.

Data Mining Opinions Rita Assetto E-Discovery Fall 2009.

Lori A. Tetreault, Esq. May 17, We’re Gonna talk About:  Pre-trial Discovery  The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  “Electronically Stored.

P RINCIPLES 1-7 FOR E LECTRONIC D OCUMENT P RODUCTION Maryanne Post.

Mon. Nov. 26. Work Product “Privilege” A witness, X, who is friendly to the D was interviewed by P’s attorney and a statement was drawn up Is there any.

2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Will Change How You Address Electronically Stored Information Bay Area Intellectual Property Inn.

The Challenge of Rule 26(f) Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer July 15, 2011.

RIM in the Age of E-Discovery RIM in the Age of E-Discovery FIRM Summer Program June 23, 2009 Christina Ayiotis, Esq., CRM Group Counsel– E-Discovery &

1 Record Management, Electronic Discovery, and the Changing Legal Landscape Dino Tsibouris (614)

The Risks of Waiver and the Costs of Pre- Production Privilege Review of Electronic Data 232 F.R.D. 228 (D. Md. 2005) Magistrate Judge, Grimm.

Digital Government Summit

© 2010 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Primary Changes To The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Effective December 1, 2015 Presented By Shuman, McCuskey, & Slicer, PLLC.

Changes to the Federal e- Discovery Rules and Their Impact on HIM and the EHR Arthur J. Fried, Esq. Epstein Becker & Green Daniel Garrie, Esq. Zeichner.

Copyright © 2015 Bradley & Riley PC - All rights reserved. October 30, 2015 IA ACC 2 nd Annual Corp. Counsel Forum Timothy J. Hill Laura M. Hyer N EW F.

The Sedona Principles November 16, Background- What is The Sedona Conference The Sedona Conference is an educational institute, established in 1997,

In Re Seroquel Products Liability Litigation United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2007.

E-Discovery And why it matters to a SSA. What is E-Discovery? E-Discovery is the process during litigation of discovering information relevant to litigation.

Electronic Discovery Guidelines Meet and Confer - General definition. a requirement of courts that before certain types of motions and/or petitions will.

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 17 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 4, 2002.

1 PRESERVATION: E-Discovery Marketfare Annunciation, LLC, et al. v. United Fire &Casualty Insurance Co.

RULES. After five years of discussion and public comment the proposed amendments took effect on December 1, 2006…specifically changing language in six.

EDiscovery Also known as “ESI” Discovery of “Electronically Stored Information” Same discovery, new form of storage.

Proposed and Recent Changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 22 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America October 16, 2002.

Title of Presentation Technology and the Attorney-Client Relationship: Risks and Opportunities Jay Glunt, Ogletree DeakinsJohn Unice, Covestro LLC Jennifer.

Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Financial Corp., 306 F.3d 99 (2d. Cir. 2002).

CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2005 SECTIONS C & F CLASS 21 DISCOVERY II October 11, 2005.

Electronic Discovery Guidelines FRCP 26(f) mandates that parties “meaningfully meet and confer” to consider the nature of their respective claims and defenses.

Practice Pointers: Effective Presentation of an Appeal Before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Presentation to Federal Bar Association North.

CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2003 SECTION F CLASS 22/23 DISCOVERY IV.

AEMCPresentation to GWCFPAGE 1 AEMC and Rule changes Presentation to AEMO Gas Wholesale Consultative Forum Kamlesh Khelawan Director This presentation.

2015 Civil Rules Amendments. I. History of Rule 26 Amendments.

Information Technology & The Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Sonya Naar - DLA Piper US LLP Doug Herman - UHY Advisors FLVS, Inc.

The Future of Discovery Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Compliance procedure under the Protocol on Water and Health

Class III Objectives Subject Matter:

Presentation transcript:

FRCP 26(f) Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries Ryann M. Buckman Electronic Discovery September 21, 2009 Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion What does 26(f) cover in general? What do the provisions mean? Rule 26: Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery (f) Conference of the Parties; Planning for Discovery (1) Conference Timing (2) Conference Content; Parties’ Responsibilities (3) Discovery Plan (4) Expedited Schedule

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion What does 26(f) cover in general? What do the provisions mean? 26(f)(1) Conference Timing As soon as practicable A minimum of 21 days before scheduling conference 26(f)(2) Conference Content; Parties’ Responsibilities Consider claims and defenses/ Possibility of settling Potential discovery problems Preservation Develop discovery plan Attorneys are responsible for: (1) arranging the conference, (2) good faith, (3) submitting discovery plan within 14 days after conference.

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion What does 26(f) cover in general? What do the provisions mean? 26(f)(3) Discovery Plan Amend aspects of required disclosures under 26(a) Subjects where discovery may be needed and timing of the discovery process ESI: Potential Issues/Problems and form of production Privilege Procedure Changes of Discovery Limitations Other orders under 26(c), 16(b), and 16(c) 26(f)(4) Expedited Schedule “Meet and confer” may be required in fewer than 21 days. Discovery plan should be given in writing less than14 days after conference or may be provided orally.

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion Sedona Principle 3 Commentary Sedona Principle 3 “Parties should confer early in discovery regarding the preservation and production of electronically stored information when these matters are at issue in the litigation and seek to agree on the scope of each party’s rights and responsibilities.”

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion Sedona Principle 3 Commentary The meet and confer depends upon the parties’ candor, diligence and reasonableness. The requesting party should have sufficient knowledge of the production options in order to be able to request a form. Purpose: Prevent discovery disputes in order to foster discovery.

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion Other FRCP Implicated FRCP 16: Scheduling Conference 26(f)(1): The “meet and confer” must be held 21 days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference. 16(f)(1)(B): Authorizes sanctions for not being prepared or not participating in 26(f) conference in good faith. FRCP 34(b)(1)(C): Allows the requesting party to specify the form of production of ESI. FRCP 34(b)(2)(D): The responding party can object to the form requested. FRCP 34(b)(2)(E)(ii): If the requesting party does not specify a form, the responding party must produce in a form in which the information is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form.

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion Conclusion/ Outcome Questions FRCP 26(f) and Sedona Principle 3 both require: The parties to work cooperatively In conferring about ESI/Discovery Prior to the Rule 16 Scheduling conference

Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries E-Discovery Conclusion Conclusion/ Outcome Questions Question 1: Does it harm the plaintiffs case to do away with the adversarial system during the rule 26(f) “meet and confer?” Question 2: Should rule 26(f) be amended to say explicitly what aspects of e-discovery should be addressed at every “meet and confer”?