PULLING BACK THE CURTAIN ON E-DISCOVERY Gene Blanton.

Slides:



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

Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co.
The Evolving Law of E-Discovery Joseph J. Ortego, Esq. Nixon Peabody LLP New York, NY Jericho, NY.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2004 District Justice Scheindlin Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC Zubulake V.
Litigation Holds: Don’t Live in Fear of Spoliation Jason CISO – University of Connecticut October 30, 2014 Information Security Office.
E-Discovery New Rules of Civil Procedure Presented by Lucy Isaki January 23, 2007.
INFORMATION WITHOUT BORDERS CONFERENCE February 7, 2013 e-DISCOVERY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.
Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O’Lakes, Inc.  Motion Hearing before a Magistrate Judge in Federal Court  District of Colorado  Decided in 2007.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) Training.
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.
A PROACTIVE APPROACH TO E-DISCOVERY March 4, 2009 Presented to the Corporate Counsel Section of the Tarrant County Bar Association Carl C. Butzer Jackson.
1 A Practical Guide to eDiscovery in Litigation Presented by: Christopher N. Weiss Aric H. Jarrett Stoel Rives LLP Public Risk Management Association (PRIMA),
5 Vital Components of Every Custodian Interview David Meadows, PMP, Managing Director – Discovery Consulting, Kroll Ontrack Dave Canfield, EJD, Managing.
E-Discovery for System Administrators Russell M. Shumway.
Project Planning and Management in E-Discovery DAVID A. ELLIS – MAYER BROWN BROWNING E. MAREAN – DLA PIPER.
E-Discovery LIMITS ON E-DISCOVERY. No New Preservation Rule When does duty to preserve attach? Reasonably anticipated litigation. Audio sanctions.
W W W. D I N S L A W. C O M E-Discovery and Document Retention Patrick W. Michael, Esq. Dinsmore & Shohl LLP 101 South Fifth Street Louisville, KY
Avoiding Sanctions & Surprises The ethics of discovery Kat Meyer, Esq. President of Conquest eDiscovery, LLC.
E -nuff! : Practical Tips For Keeping s From Derailing Your Case Presented by Jerry L. Mitchell.
Developing a Records & Information Retention & Disposition Program:
1 E-Discovery Changes to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Concerning Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Effective Date: 12/01/2006 October,
Xact Data Discovery People Technology Communication make discovery projects happen XACT DATA DISCOVERY Because you need to know
Louisiana Association for Justice Ethics Webinar December 5, 2013 Robert E. Kleinpeter Yigal Bander.
Electronic Record Retention and eDiscovery Peter Pepiton eDiscovery Product Manager CA Information Governance.
Get Off of My I-Cloud: Role of Technology in Construction Practice Sanjay Kurian, Esq. Trent Walton, CTO U.S. Legal Support.
* 07/16/96 The production of ESI continues to present challenges in the discovery process even though specific rules have been drafted, commented on, redrafted.
Investigating & Preserving Evidence in Data Security Incidents Robert J. Scott Scott & Scott, LLP
©2011 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley E-DISCOVERY Hélène Kazanjian Anne Sterman Trial Division.
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
Discovery III Expert Witness Disclosure And Discovery Motions & Sanctions.
E-Discovery in Health Care Litigation By Tracy Vigness Kolb.
FRCP 26(f) Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries Ryann M. Buckman Electronic Discovery September 21, 2009 Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle.
Discussion Peggy Beeley, MD 2/11/14 Mitigating Medical Malpractice Risks Through Documentation.
Rewriting the Law in the Digital Age
2009 CHANGES IN CALIFORNIA DISCOVERY RULES The California Electronic Discovery Act Batya Swenson E-discovery Task Force
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.
Against: The Liberal Definition and use of Litigation Holds Team 9.
P RINCIPLES 1-7 FOR E LECTRONIC D OCUMENT P RODUCTION Maryanne Post.
The Challenge of Rule 26(f) Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer July 15, 2011.
Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O’Lakes, Inc. 224 F.R.D. 614 (D. Colo. 2007) By: Sara Alsaleh Case starts on page 136 of the book!
ILTA – Insight 2007 E-Disclosure --Preparing for Compliance-- Moderator: Sally Gonzalez, Director, Navigant Consulting, Inc. Panelists: Oz Benamram, Director.
Digital Government Summit
Records Management for Paper and ESI Document Retention Policies addressing creation, management and disposition Minimize the risk and exposure Information.
© 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.
E-Discovery 2007 STRIMA Conference Portland, Maine New Rules of Civil Procedure Lucy Isaki State Risk Manager Senior Assistant Director/Legal Counsel Office.
Emerging Case Law and Recent eDiscovery Decisions.
The Sedona Principles November 16, Background- What is The Sedona Conference The Sedona Conference is an educational institute, established in 1997,
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.
Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act Heather Willis Neal Indiana Public Access Counselor Presented to Indiana State Department of Health August 21, 2008.
Electronic Discovery Guidelines Meet and Confer - General definition. a requirement of courts that before certain types of motions and/or petitions will.
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York 229 F.R.D. 422 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)
EDiscovery Also known as “ESI” Discovery of “Electronically Stored Information” Same discovery, new form of storage.
Title of Presentation Technology and the Attorney-Client Relationship: Risks and Opportunities Jay Glunt, Ogletree DeakinsJohn Unice, Covestro LLC Jennifer.
Shadbolt & Co LLP Solicitors E-DISCLOSURE IN THE ENGLISH COURTS – REVEALING ALL? ABA CONFERENCE OCTOBER 2005 Kate Matthews Commercial Litigation and Dispute.
Electronic Discovery Guidelines FRCP 26(f) mandates that parties “meaningfully meet and confer” to consider the nature of their respective claims and defenses.
Investigations: Strategies and Recommendations (Hints and Tips) Leah Lane, CFE Director, Global Investigations, Texas Instruments, Inc.
Morgan Stanley Team 2. Background Coleman (Parent) Holdings, Inc. v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 2005 LEXIS 94 (Fla. Cir. Ct. March 23, 2005.) The jury returned.
E-Discovery Copyright 2008 Thomas F. Goldman. WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO US NOW? OH NO, NOT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!! Overview.
Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) Training
Leveraging the Data Map – A Case Study November 15, 2016
Information Technology & The Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Sonya Naar - DLA Piper US LLP Doug Herman - UHY Advisors FLVS, Inc.
The Ethics of Technology
Litigation Holds: Don’t Live in Fear of Spoliation
Legal Ethics of Information Governance Presented by Sean Monahan
Records Retention and Its Effects on Discovery
Presentation transcript:

PULLING BACK THE CURTAIN ON E-DISCOVERY Gene Blanton

PULLING BACK THE CURTAIN ON E-DISCOVERY  Judicial expectations and potential consequences  E-Discovery rules in Texas  Ethical considerations  Type and scope of client documents  Client education  Vendor guidance

E-DISCOVERY TRENDS  2009: $243,  2010: $197,  2010: $860,  2011: $637,612.50

E-DISCOVERY TRENDS  $637, (346 S.W.3d 37) Court of Appeals Fourteenth District, Houston  Sanctions awarded under Tex. R. Civ. P (b)(8) – failure to obey a court order.

LOSING BEFORE YOU START  Consequences for ignorance: –Having claims stricken –Production of attorney-client communications –Sanctions or recovery of e-discovery costs –$100,000 spoliation claims

JUDICIAL EXPECTATIONS “Electronic discovery requires cooperation between opposing counsel and transparency in all aspects of preservation and production of ESI….It is time that the Bar – even those lawyers who did not come of age in the computer era – understand this.” “Electronic discovery requires cooperation between opposing counsel and transparency in all aspects of preservation and production of ESI….It is time that the Bar – even those lawyers who did not come of age in the computer era – understand this.” William A. Gross Constr. Assocs., Inc. v. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 2009 WL (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2009). William A. Gross Constr. Assocs., Inc. v. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co., 2009 WL (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 19, 2009).

BACK TO BASICS – WHAT IS E-DISCOVERY?  The access and use of information, data, and records created or maintained in electronic media.  It includes obtaining new information, in new forms, in new places, from new sources, and using it in a new manner.

E-DISCOVERY RULES  TRCP 192.3(b): Electronic or videotape recordings, data, and data compilations are discoverable.

E-DISCOVERY RULES -- TRCP  Requesting Party –Specifically request production of electronic/magnetic data –Specify the form in which to produce  Responding Party –Produce data if data is  Responsive and  Reasonably available

E-DISCOVERY RULES – TRCP (cont’d)  When data not reasonably available - –Responding party must state an objection complying with these rules. –If objection is overruled, responding party must comply with the request and –the court must also order that the requesting party pay the reasonable expenses of any extraordinary steps required to retrieve and produce the information.

E-DISCOVERY RULES - TRCP 196.6: EXPENSES OF PRODUCTION  Requesting Party –expense of inspecting, sampling, testing, photographing, and copying items produced  Responding Party –expense of producing items

DISCOVERY RULES -- TRCP 215.2(b)(8) –Consequences for not complying with discovery orders  Party or Attorney or both can be required to pay reasonable expenses and attorney fees caused by failure  Unless failure was “substantially justified” or an award would be unjust

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS  ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1: requires lawyers provide competent representation to a client.  Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.  E-Discovery knowledge necessary for competency?

MEETING JUDICIAL EXPECTATIONS BEFORE A LAWSUIT BEGINS  As Lawyers, we need to get educated on: –Types of documents our clients use, –Scope of those documents, –Document retention/destruction policies –Types of electronic storage and archiving that clients use

MEETING JUDICIAL EXPECTATIONS (Cont’d.)  What clients need to know to help avoid sanctions: –Scope and sources of their documents –Duty to preserve evidence –Discovery costs –Privilege

GETTING TO KNOW THE NEW SOURCES AND TYPES OF DATA Newer sources: Newer sources: s and electronic documents s and electronic documents Social media:Social media: Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter LinkedIn LinkedIn YouTube YouTube Blogs Blogs Text messages/IMText messages/IM USB DrivesUSB Drives Classic sources: Facsimiles Facsimiles Voic s Voic s Phone records Phone records Contact management systems Contact management systems Time and billing records Time and billing records

COMPARING CLIENT DATA OF YESTERDAY AND TODAY Amount of Data PagesBoxes 1 Megabyte (MB) 75 Less than 1 1 Gigabyte 75, Terabyte 75,000,00025,000

SCOPE OF CLIENT DOCUMENTS (CONT’D.)  An estimate from Lexis Nexis:

SCOPE OF ELECTRONIC DATA  Increasing data in a paperless world: –2005 estimate of 1 gig/custodian –2011 estimate of 8-10 gigs/custodian  Microsoft estimates 17.5 gigs for each custodian (approximately 430 banker boxes of paper)

HOW DO WE MANAGE THIS MUCH DATA?  Use the metadata – the data about the data – that tells details about a particular document or data set which ascribes how, when, and by whom it was created, accessed, modified, or formatted.

HOW METADATA IS USED  Narrowing data ranges  Batch culling privileged information  Key word/hot doc searches  Preparation of witness files  Exclusion of duplicates  Etc…

CLIENT ISSUES TO ADDRESS BECAUSE OF SO MUCH DATA  Types of policies in place and methods to ensure enforcement.  Types of social media policies utilized by clients in their offices and on projects.  Organization, storage, and control of s and other electronic sources of information.

DUTY TO PRESERVE AND LITIGATION HOLDS  When does the duty to preserve arise?  What does a litigation hold do?  Is a preservation letter or written litigation hold required?  F.R.C.P. 37e (Safe Harbor Rule)

PRESERVATION LETTERS  Preservation letters should address the following: –Specific witnesses or custodians –Date ranges –Specific types of electronic document  Kitchen sink vs. narrowly tailored letters

CLAIMS OF SPOLIATION  Spoliation claims –What are they? –When do they arise?  Types of issues and evidence addressed? –Bad faith and conscious disregard of the duty to preserve relevant evidence –Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc.

ROLE OF THE CONSULTANT  Experienced e-discovery consultants assist with: –Understanding the client’s daily operations –Assist with statutory meet and confer requirements –Assist with the harvesting and reviewing of electronically stored information (ESI)

CONTROLLING E-DISCOVERY COSTS  Understand client electronic data before litigation arises  Follow-up on enforcement of document retention and destruction policy

EXAMPLES OF COST SHIFTING  FRCP 26(b)(2)(B) and TRCP – must prove that ESI is inaccessible through reasonable efforts before a court considers shifting  Courts have allowed a prevailing party to recover the costs of converting paper documents into electronic files where the parties agreed that responsive documents would be produced in an electronic format.

TYPES OF TOOLS FOR CONTROLLING COSTS  New technologies save time and money: – and document archival systems –Self-collection tools –Advanced search and cull applications –Cloud-based hosting and review –Machine learning/predictive coding

TIPS FOR REDUCING COSTS  Best practices for reducing harvesting and review costs: –Meet and confer with opposing counsel –Meet with e-discovery consultants regularly –Embrace new technologies designed for cost savings –Utilize lower cost resources for review when possible

Thank You for Attending. Gene Blanton