www.cloudninediscovery.com

Subscription Center

Sign up to receive eDiscovery Daily's articles via email or add the RSS feed to your newsreader of choice.

  • RSS Feed

Library

Browse eDiscovery Daily Blog

About the Bloggers

Brad Jenkins

Brad Jenkins, President and CEO of CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years of experience leading customer focused companies in the litigation support arena. Brad has authored many articles on litigation support issues, and has spoken before national audiences on document management practices and solutions.

Doug Austin

Doug Austin, Professional Services Manager for CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years experience providing legal technology consulting and technical project management services to numerous commercial and government clients. Doug has also authored several articles on eDiscovery best practices.

Jane Gennarelli

Jane Gennarelli is a principal of Magellan’s Law Corporation and has been assisting litigators in effectively handling discovery materials for over 30 years. She authored the company’s Best Practices in a Box™ content product and assists firms in applying technology to document handling tasks. She is a known expert and often does webinars and presentations for litigation support professionals around the country. Jane can be reached by email at [email protected]

Privileged

Clawback Rights Upheld and Plaintiff Sanctioned for Refusal to Comply Concerning Inadvertently Produced Privileged Documents - eDiscovery Case Law

March 25, 2014

By Doug Austin

In RIPL Corp. v. Google Inc., seven discovery-related motions were heard concerning this trademark infringement action. The various motions to seal, compel, enforce, and sanction were filed after the parties had entered into a stipulated protective order. Washington District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez granted in part, denied in part, and deferred in part the various motions.

Read more

Apple Can’t Mention Inadvertent Disclosure in Samsung Case - eDiscovery Case Law

March 13, 2014

By Doug Austin

Back in January, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP was sanctioned for their inadvertent disclosure in the Apple vs Samsung litigation (commonly referred to as “patentgate”). California Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal handed down an order on motions for sanctions against Quinn Emanuel (in essence) requiring the firm to “reimburse Apple, Nokia, and their counsel for any and all costs and fees incurred in litigating this motion and the discovery associated with it”. Many felt that Samsung and Quinn Emanuel got off lightly. Now, Apple can’t even mention the inadvertent disclosure in the upcoming Samsung trial.

Read more

EDRM Updates Privacy & Security Risk Reduction Model – eDiscovery Best Practices

February 17, 2014

By Doug Austin

As they announced last week, the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) announced the reintroduction and refinement of its Privacy & Security Risk Reduction Model (PSRRM). Initially introduced last September by EDRM’s Data Set group (and covered on this blog here), the model provides a process for reducing the volume of private, protected and risky data by using a series of steps applied in sequence as part of the information management, identification, preservation and collection phases of the Electronic Discovery Reference Model.

Read more

Quinn Emanuel Sanctioned for Inadvertent Disclosure, Samsung Escapes Sanction – eDiscovery Case Law

January 31, 2014

By Doug Austin

California Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal has now handed down an order on motions for sanctions against Samsung and the Quinn Emanuel law firm in the never-ending Apple v. Samsung litigation for the inadvertent disclosure of confidential agreements that Apple had with Nokia, Ericsson, Sharp and Philips – now widely referred to as “patentgate”.

Read more

Samsung Again Owes Apple Almost $1 Billion, Sanction Deadline Nears – eDiscovery Case Law

December 02, 2013

By Doug Austin

The news continues to get worse for Samsung Electronics Co. in its colossal legal battle with Apple Inc. A California federal jury ruled on November 21 that Samsung owes Apple $290.5 million for selling mobile devices that infringed five iPhone and iPad patents, bringing the total awarded for infringing on Apple products to almost $930 million.

Read more

The Ubiquitous Apple Samsung Case and “Patentgate” – eDiscovery Case Law

November 15, 2013

By Doug Austin

When something gets the “gate” suffix added to it, that’s not a good thing. It’s hard to believe that a case can get more intense than when a billion dollar verdict is awarded (later reduced to a measly $599 million), but the Apple v. Samsung case seems to only be getting more intense, due to the disclosure of confidential agreements that Apple had with Nokia, Ericsson, Sharp and Philips – now widely referred to as “patentgate”.

Read more

Court Rules Defendant Doesn’t Have Controls of PCs of Former Members, Denies Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel – eDiscovery Case Law

November 11, 2013

By Doug Austin

To require a party to produce evidence in discovery, the party must have “possession, custody, or control” of the evidence. In Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the Kickapoo Reservation in Kansas v. Nemaha Brown Watershed Joint District No. 7, the defendant did not have control over the personal computers of its former members, employees, or staff; it did not have the legal right to obtain information from them “on demand.” Therefore, the court rejected the plaintiff’s motion to compel and refused to order the forensic examination of the personal computers of current or former members, employees, or staff.

Read more

What is “Reduping?” – eDiscovery Explained

October 28, 2013

By Doug Austin

As emails are sent out to multiple custodians, deduplication (or “deduping”) has become a common practice to eliminate multiple copies of the same email or file from the review collection, saving considerable review costs and ensuring consistency by not having different reviewers apply different responsiveness or privilege determinations to the same file. Everyone who works in electronic discovery knows what “deduping” is. But how many of you know what “reduping” is?

Read more

For Successful Discovery, Think Backwards – eDiscovery Best Practices

October 08, 2013

By Doug Austin

The Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) has become the standard model for the workflow of the process for handling electronically stored information (ESI) in discovery. But, to succeed in discovery, regardless whether you’re the producing party or the receiving party, it might be helpful to think about the EDRM model backwards.

Read more

A Model for Reducing Private Data – eDiscovery Best Practices

September 24, 2013

By Doug Austin

Since the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) annual meeting just four short months ago in May, several EDRM projects (Metrics, Jobs, Data Set and the new Native Files project) have already announced new deliverables and/or requested feedback. Now, the Data Set project has announced another new deliverable – a new Privacy Risk Reduction Model.

Read more

eDiscovery Daily is Three Years Old!

September 20, 2013

By Doug Austin

We’ve always been free, now we are three! It’s hard to believe that it has been three years ago today since we launched the eDiscoveryDaily blog. We’re past the “terrible twos” and heading towards pre-school. Before you know it, we’ll be ready to take our driver’s test! Here are some posts over the last six months you may have missed.

Read more

Important Considerations when Negotiating Search Terms with Opposing Counsel – eDiscovery Best Practices

June 06, 2013

By Doug Austin

Negotiating search terms with opposing counsel has become commonplace to agree on the scope of discovery. However, when you negotiate terms with the other side, you could be agreeing to produce more than you think. Craig Ball’s latest article in Law Technology News discusses the issues and tries to answer the question: Are Keywords Just Filters?

Read more

Four More Tips to Quash the Cost of eDiscovery – eDiscovery Best Practices

April 01, 2013

By Doug Austin

Thursday, we covered the first four tips from Craig Ball’s informative post on his blog (Ball in your Court) entitled Eight Tips to Quash the Cost of E-Discovery with tips on saving eDiscovery costs. Today, we’ll discuss the last four tips.

Read more

Eight Tips to Quash the Cost of eDiscovery – eDiscovery Best Practices

March 28, 2013

By Doug Austin

By now, Craig Ball needs no introduction our readers as he has been a thought leader interview participant for the past three years. I’m a regular reader of his blog, Ball in your Court and, last week, he published a very informative post entitled Eight Tips to Quash the Cost of E-Discovery with tips on saving eDiscovery costs. I thought we would cover those tips here, with some commentary.

Read more

eDiscovery Daily Is Thirty! (Months Old, That Is)

March 21, 2013

By Doug Austin

Thirty months ago yesterday, eDiscovery Daily was launched. It’s hard to believe that it has been 2 1/2 years since our first three posts that debuted on our first day. 635 posts later, a lot has happened in the industry that we’ve covered. And, yes we’re still crazy after all these years for committing to a daily post each business day, but we still haven’t missed a business day yet. Twice a year, we like to take a look back at some of the important stories and topics during that time. So, here are just a few of the posts over the last six months you may have missed. Enjoy!

Read more

2012 eDiscovery Year in Review: eDiscovery Case Law, Part 3

January 17, 2013

By Doug Austin

As we noted the past two days, eDiscoveryDaily published 98 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 62 unique cases! Yesterday, we looked back at cases related to social media and the first cases approving technology assisted review. Today, let’s take a look back at cases related to admissibility and the duty to preserve and produce electronically stored information (ESI).

Read more

2012 eDiscovery Year in Review: eDiscovery Case Law, Part 1

January 15, 2013

By Doug Austin

2012 was quite a year from an eDiscovery standpoint, with a number of cases that impacted how organizations handle discovery. As we did last year, it seems appropriate to review cases from 2012 before moving forward to this year. eDiscoveryDaily published 98 posts related to eDiscovery case decisions and activities over the past year, covering 62 unique cases! Perhaps you missed some of these? Now is your chance to catch up!

Read more

Emails Between Husband and Wife Are Not Privileged, If Sent from Work Computer – eDiscovery Case Law

January 10, 2013

By Doug Austin

In United States v. Hamilton, the Fourth Circuit found that the district court had not abused its discretion in finding that e-mails between the defendant and his wife did not merit marital privilege protection because the defendant had used his office computer and his work e-mail account to send and receive the communications and because he had not taken steps to protect the e-mails in question, even after his employer instituted a policy permitting inspection of e-mails and he was on notice of the policy.

Read more

Percentage of eDiscovery Sanctions Cases Declining – eDiscovery Trends

December 11, 2012

By Doug Austin

According to Kroll Ontrack, the percentage of eDiscovery cases addressing sanctions “dropped by approximately ten percent” compared to 2011, while “cases addressing procedural issues more than doubled”. Let’s take a closer look at the numbers and look at some cases in each category.

Read more

Cloning of Computer Files: When There’s a Will, There’s a Way – eDiscovery Case Law

October 18, 2012

By Doug Austin

In Matter of Tilimbo, a court held it was permissible to order cloning of computer files where doing so did not place an unreasonable burden on a nonparty, appropriate steps were taken to protect any privileged information, and the nonparty had not previously produced the requested information in hard copy.

Read more

Inadvertent Disclosure? Got Clawback? – eDiscovery Best Practices

September 28, 2012

By Doug Austin

As discovery becomes more complex and voluminous, it seems as though we’re seeing more and more cases where inadvertent disclosures of privileged documents are becoming more common. In just the past couple of months, we’ve discussed two cases on this blog, where the producing parties were forced to waive privilege of those documents when they failed the now popular five factor test to determine whether an inadvertent disclosure entitles the producing party to have the documents returned. Perhaps if they had a well-defined “clawback” agreement, the results would have been different?

Read more

Another Disclosure of Privileged Documents Fails the Five Factor Test – eDiscovery Case Law

September 24, 2012

By Doug Austin

In Inhalation Plastics, Inc. v. Medex Cardio-Pulmonary, Inc., Ohio Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King found that the defendant had waived the attorney-client privilege was waived for 347 emails inadvertently produced, because they failed all factors in the five factor test to determine whether the inadvertent disclosure entitles the producing party to the return of the documents in question.

Read more

http://www.cloudninediscovery.com/ondemand/free-software-trial.aspx