Sign up to receive eDiscovery Daily's articles via email or add the RSS feed to your newsreader of choice.
Browse eDiscovery Daily Blog
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, 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 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 jane@litigationbestpractices.com.
April 01, 2013
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 moreMarch 28, 2013
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 moreMarch 21, 2013
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 moreJanuary 17, 2013
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 moreJanuary 15, 2013
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 moreJanuary 10, 2013
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 moreDecember 11, 2012
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 moreOctober 18, 2012
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 moreSeptember 28, 2012
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 moreSeptember 24, 2012
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 moreSeptember 20, 2012
It’s hard to believe that it has been two years ago today since we launched the eDiscoveryDaily blog. Now that we’ve hit the “terrible twos”, is the blog going to start going off on rants about various eDiscovery topics, like Will McAvoy in The Newsroom? Maybe. Or maybe not. Wouldn’t that be fun! Here are some highlights from the past six months.
Read moreSeptember 07, 2012
As noted in SiliconBeat and ARN, Judge William Alsup ordered Oracle on Tuesday to pay Google $1 million as reimbursement for Google’s fees for a court-appointed expert in their court battle over intellectual property and Google’s Android software. However, the ruling is only a partial victory for Google, who was seeking $4 million from Oracle in reimbursement of costs associated with the case.
Read moreAugust 17, 2012
In E.E.O.C. v Fry’s Electronics, Inc., Washington District Judge Robert S. Lasnik ordered several sanctions against the defendant in this sexual harassment case (including ordering the defendant to pay $100,000 in monetary sanctions and ordering that certain evidence be considered presumptively admissible at trial), but stopped short of entering a default judgment against the defendant. This ruling came after having previously ordered sanctions against the defendant less than two months earlier.
Read moreAugust 03, 2012
Here is yet another case of inadvertently disclosed privileged documents. In Blythe v. Bell, North Carolina Business Superior Court Judge James L. Gale denied a motion for an order compelling the return of privileged documents inadvertently disclosed by the defendants, ruling that privilege had been waived on those documents.
Read moreJuly 10, 2012
If an electronic document is a “house” for information, then metadata could be considered the “deed” to that house. Metadata, which is data about the document, contains information such as the user who created it, creation date, the edit history, and file type. There are many different types of metadata and it is important to understand each with regard to requesting that metadata in opposing counsel productions and being prepared to produce it in your own productions. Here are some examples.
Read moreJune 21, 2012
We like to point out good articles about eDiscovery on this blog to keep our readers aware of trends and best practices. I recently read an article on InsideCounsel titled E-discovery: Memorializing the e-discovery process, written by Alvin Lindsay, which had some good specific examples of where good documentation is important to prevent sanctions and save litigation costs.
Read moreJune 08, 2012
In D’Onofrio v. Borough of Seaside Park, New Jersey Magistrate Judge Tonianne Bongiovanni denied the defendants’ motion for discovery to reclaim privileged documents that were inadvertently produced, finding that privilege was waived because the defendants failed to take reasonable measures to rectify the disclosure.
Read moreMay 29, 2012
In Ceglia v. Zuckerberg (the case where Paul Ceglia is suing claiming 84% ownership of Facebook due to an alleged agreement he had with Mark Zuckerberg back in 2003), New York Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio ruled that an information technology expert’s inadvertent disclosure waived the attorney-client privilege where the plaintiff could not show that it (1) took reasonable steps to prevent the disclosure of the e-mail and (2) took reasonable steps to rectify the error once it discovered the disclosure.
Read moreMay 25, 2012
While traveling back from Los Angeles for LegalTech West Coast 2012 (LTWC) this week, I saw an interesting story on the Above the Law blog (with references to The Economist, DeepCapture and Rolling Stone) regarding a litigation blunder committed by a major law firm on behalf of a major client, inadvertently disclosing an unredacted version of a sensitive document.
Read moreApril 05, 2012
A recent article on The National Law Journal (entitled Top 12 tips for saving money in litigation, authored by Damon W.D. Wright) had some good tips for – you guessed it – saving money during litigation. I thought it would be worth discussing some of these, especially those that relate to eDiscovery cost savings practices.
Read moreApril 03, 2012
In Jacob v. Duane Reade, Inc., Magistrate Judge Theodore Katz of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York found that a privileged, two-page email that was inadvertently produced did not have to be returned and that the privilege had been waived because the producing party, Duane Reade, had failed to request its return in a timely manner. According to Defendants' counsel, the ESI production involved the review of over two million documents in less than a month; that review was accomplished with the assistance of an outside vendor and document review team.
Read moreMarch 30, 2012
On Dec. 8 of last year, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware revised the "Default Standard for Discovery, Including Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (ESI)" for the third time to reflect recent changes in technology and to address concerns of attorneys regarding the discovery of ESI. The new Default Standard expects the parties to reach agreements cooperatively on how to conduct discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26-36. If the parties are unable to agree on the parameters and/or timing of discovery, the default standards will apply until further order of the Court or the parties reach agreement (which is why it’s a default standard).
Read more
CloudNine Discovery provides specialized national litigation support services focusing on technology in electronic discovery, computer forensics document imaging and online document review. Our nationwide litigation services company has offices in Houston, Texas.
Leaders in Litigation Support Software Services
get social with us NOW: 
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and in no way indicative of the views held by CloudNine Discovery. No representation is made as to whether the information provided is the most current available. This blog/Web site is made available by the contributors solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. The blog/Web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.
