Case Law

8 Lessons Learned – Part IV – Disclosure of Recipients of Litigation Hold Notices

A significant ruling in the Social Media Addiction case has determined that fundamental information about individuals who receive litigation hold notices should not be withheld. This decision is crucial, as it challenges established beliefs regarding...

8 Lessons Learned – Part III – Redaction Provision of ESI Protocol

This article examines the redaction provisions of the ESI Protocol from the recent Social Media Adolescent Addiction litigation, focusing on legal standards for redacting irrelevant, privileged, and confidential information and the procedural guidelines enforced by...

8 Lessons Learned – Part II – “Hit” Report Provision of ESI Protocol

In this second installment of Berman’s 8 Lessons Learned, we delve deeper into the essentials of ESI protocols, examining their application in the Social Media Adolescent Addiction case. This segment underscores the vital role of...

8 Lessons Learned – Part I – The “Humpty Dumpty” Clause of ESI Protocol

This article examines the “Humpty Dumpty” clause in ESI protocol within the Social Media Addiction lawsuit. It focuses on the challenges and strategies for handling electronic documents with hyperlinks, including the evidentiary issues they pose....

4 Things You Never Wanted to Hear + 8 Lessons & a Dispute Over Revealing Recipients of Litigation Hold Notices, All in One Case

According to the ruling in the Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation case, specific ESI protocols are crucial to ensure that electronically stored information is handled correctly. The court also determined that the...

ESI Protocol Dispute – “Modern Attachments” and the “Humpty Dumpty Issue”

In Re: Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation, 2024 WL 1772832 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 23, 2024), resolved a dispute over so-called “modern attachments” based on impressive and comprehensive technical presentations by sophisticated experts. Michael Berman...

There is Difference Between a Discovery-Based Daubert Exclusionary Ruling and a Discovery Sanction

In the recent case of Asokere v. Waldrop, the Appeals Court closely examined the effects of changing sworn expert testimony between deposition and Daubert hearings. This examination revealed essential differences between Daubert exclusionary rulings and...

Accurate and Complete Discovery Responses Can Be Strategically Advantageous

Explore the case of Management and Construction Services, LLC v. Sayers Construction, LLC. It highlights the importance of accurate and complete discovery responses in litigation. The court’s perspective shows that such precision in discovery can...

There’s No Right or Wrong Answer – But There Are Mistakes

In Rayome v. ABT Electronics, 2024 WL 1435098 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 3, 2024), the court wrote that “it would be in the parties’ interest to reach a negotiated result. It should not be forgotten that a...

April’s Notable Cases and Events in E-Discovery

Gain insights on e-discovery with an analysis of U.S. court rulings on spoliation sanctions and electronic data management. This month’s notable cases cover reasonably useful forms of production and when intent can be inferred from...

Court Orders Parties to Enter Into an ESI Protocol

In the unusual context of a Delaware federal subpoena for discovery in a Spanish proceeding, a court ordered the parties“to meet and confer to discuss the scope of each request and to enter an agreed-upon ESI protocol and protective...

General Objections, Dracula, and “Whac a Mole”