Case
← Back to Blog
Search
Authors
When a Redacted Document Was Used to Prepare a Witness, Only the Redacted Document Needs to Be Produced in Discovery
Plaintiff Mr. Corkery filed an emergency motion to amend or remove redactions to a document that he planned to use in an upcoming deposition. He also sought a privilege log for the redactions, “if any...
Are an Expert’s A.I. Prompts Discoverable? Maybe.
Michael D. Berman uses Villanueva v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dept. to discuss disclosing AI prompt systems in court, and the protections around AI searches.
Timing of Propounding and Responding to “Contention Interrogatories”
Michael D. Berman examines when contention interrogatories become ripe for response, highlighting a Carvana ruling that favors responses near the end of fact discovery.
New York Court’s A.I. Regulation Did Not Violate Unrepresented Person’s Rights
Michael D. Berman examines Bradwell v. Hochul, where a federal court rejected a self-represented litigant’s constitutional challenge involving New York’s AI rules for court filings.
Asking When Untimely Discovery Responses Will Be Provided Doesn’t Consent to an Extension
In Dochee v. The Methodist Hospitals, Inc., the court addressed discovery responses served six weeks to two months late. Although it viewed Defendants’ failure to seek an extension or timely respond with disfavor, the court...
6 time management tips for lawyers handling ediscovery
Lack of time was the most commonly cited individual challenge in Nextpoint’s 2026 eDiscovery Landscape Survey, named by 41% of respondents. Elizabeth Guthrie shares six practical ways lawyers can reclaim time on eDiscovery-heavy matters by...
Dispute over A.I. Protective Order
In U.S. v. Thomas, defense counsel and the Government disputed proposed protective-order restrictions governing the use of AI in discovery. The court declined both to compel production of purportedly non-sensitive Rule 16 discovery and to...
The Case of the Missing Lab Notebooks
In Terran Biosciences, Inc. v. Compass Pathfinder Limited, defendants sought sanctions over missing physical lab notebooks in a trade secrets dispute. The court found sanctions unwarranted because defendants failed to establish that the notebooks were...
“Court Sanction for Plaintiff’s Use of Prompt-Injection”
A Connecticut court sanctioned a self-represented litigant for repeatedly concealing AI prompt-injection instructions in court filings. In Elliott v. New York Bariatric Group, LLC, the court distinguished the familiar risk of unreliable AI output from...
How Does an “Attorney’s Eyes Only” Order Apply to an Unrepresented Party?
A New York federal court ordered that Attorney’s Eyes Only material produced in redacted form to an unrepresented defendant must come with a detailed redaction log, so they can meaningfully decide whether to challenge the...
Condominium Construction Defect Litigation Leads to Search and Custodian Rulings
Michael D. Berman examines a Vermont federal court’s order requiring a condominium association to disclose its keyword search methodology in detail, while rejecting a developer’s bid to force ESI collection from every current and former...
An Attorney-Client Communication Advising Spoliation is Not Privileged
Michael D. Berman examines a ruling that advice to spoliate evidence is not privileged, though the court found no actual destruction because both pre- and post-advice versions of Meta’s disputed documents survived and were ordered...