Lumix

By Now Discovery

The “meet and confer” requirement imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (or, more specifically, FRCP 26(f)) requires that the parties to litigation must, “as soon as practicable” meet with one another to discuss a variety of issues set out in FRCP 26(f)(2). That rule includes the following: …the parties must consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for promptly settling or resolving the case; make or arrange…
https://nowdiscovery.com/frcp-26-the-scope-of-discovery/Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP, for short) empowers a court to impose several different types of sanctions for parties unable or unwilling to comply with lawful discovery orders and requests. For example, upon failure to abide by a court order (including one for discovery), Rule 37(b)(2)(A) allows a court to impose sanctions including: (i) directing that the matters embraced in the order or other designated facts be taken as established…
Broadly considered, there are a wide variety of sources of ediscovery law. That’s because ediscovery law isn’t confined to the statutes, regulations, and codes that touch on the topic of electronically stored information in litigation. Instead, there exists a bulk of advisory and professional material designed to enlighten and guide judges, lawyers, and litigants with respect to their ediscovery decisions. In this article, we’ll first briefly discuss the difference between state and federal courts, and…
Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP 45, for short) sets out the procedure for the issue of subpoenas in federal court. It includes provisions for what a subpoena must contain, how it is to be served, who can issue one, and what steps a person subject to a subpoena can take to avoid or quash the subpoena. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 also contains special provisions with respect to the…
In New Zealand, the required procedure for civil court action is set out in a set of rules for the two main courts in the country: The District Court Rules and the High Court Rules. A consultation has just been concluded on significant changes to the High Court Rules.  We discuss three core proposed changes in that consultation, and their potential impact on the process and scope of discovery below.  What is the problem with…
Artificial intelligence (AI) is fast becoming one of the most valuable tools in ediscovery, but AI is also emerging as a significant crime threat based on its ability to facilitate different types crimes across a broad spectrum of applications. Interestingly, the two disparate AI uses could easily intersect, as AI-produced fake content has been identified as a significant AI-affiliated crime threat. That was my thinking, anyway, upon reading that AI-generated audio/video and other fake…
If you’re using artificial intelligence (AI) to power your ediscovery, how can you be certain that the AI system is properly doing its job?  Trust in AI-Generated eDiscovery Well, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is working on that problem and last month proposed “four principles of explainable artificial intelligence” designed to guide AI and their programmers in providing information about the logic behind specific AI decision-making, as well as enhance…
The European Commission (the executive branch of European government) released a new data strategy earlier this year to relatively little fanfare. In this article, I look at the European Commission’s proposed new data markets or ‘data spaces’ and indicate what this could mean for discovery litigation.  Background  The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which came into force in early 2018, introduced strict new rules for any organization that is doing business with customers…
Having long been fascinated by legal professionals, but never having the wherewithal to pursue a law degree, I am changing careers and moving to Arizona where I can now legally represent clients and practice law absent a law degree or need to pass that pesky bar association exam. I will be a paraprofessional. That’s right, I will now be known as “M.J. Moye, Esq.; B.A., M.A., Para-Attorney at Law,” instead of just that “crazy writer…
Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure sets out the proper procedure with respect to interrogatories in federal actions. With one exception, the answer to the question “Can you refuse to answer interrogatories?” is a resounding, “No!” In short, Rule 33 requires that each received interrogatory must be either answered, or objected to, within 30 days of being served with the interrogatory. You might be wondering what sorts of interrogatories are objectionable or…