In Alex v. City of Ann Arbor, the court rejected objections to PDF productions and alleged “junk” documents, holding that broad discovery requests often produce broad results.
Mike Berman explores a post by Jennifer Ellis, JD, LLC. discussing Heppner, the case that says clients using AI, not at the direction of counsel, cannot withhold those documents or that ESI as privileged.
In U.S. v. Heppner, Judge Rakoff held that AI-generated documents were neither privileged nor work product. This article examines the court’s reliance on ECF 23-5 and the absence of attorney direction in shaping that outcome.
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania applied the practical ability test for possession, custody, or control under Rule 34, holding that former employees could be compelled to produce a report they had the practical ability to obtain, even without a legal right to it.
In L.S. v. Bolduan, the court applied the “legal right” test to deny Rule 34 control over documents held by shared defense counsel while signaling that use of those documents could trigger production. The decision underscores the ongoing split among courts and the growing need for a uniform national standard on “possession, custody, or control.”