|
|
||
|
Josh Gilliland and his always-entertaining “Bow Tie Law’s Blog” turn this week to the case of In re NetBank, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69031 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 7, 2009), in which the producing party went to great lengths to prove to opposing counsel and the court that they knew absolutely NOTHING about e-Discovery. The Defendants [...] From the National Law Journal, Sheri Qualters reports on the Delaware Court of Chancery’s recent spate of decisions regarding several aspects of e-discovery practice. Most significant to me is Beard Research Inc. v. Kates, in which plaintiffs were granted an adverse inference instruction for missing computer evidence. The key language: If the parties do not focus [...] From Jason Krause on Law.com comes this article regarding the Text Retrieval Conference Legal Track 2008. The main points to take from this article are that, properly used, Boolean keyword searching is equally as effective as more “advanced” search technologies such as clustering and concept searching. However, as the article points out, Judge Peck (in Gross Construction v. [...] There has been a bit of debate (okay, a LOT of debate) over what makes backup tapes truly “inaccessible”. The California Assembly is on the verge of making that discussion moot. From Law.com, this article agrees with their proposed new rule of evidence that it’s no longer necessary to consider backup data is presumptively inaccessible: Zubulake’s bright-line test [...] |
||
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2010 Liquid Litigation Management, Inc. - All Rights Reserved |
||
