Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Is Your e-Discovery Provider Asking The Right Questions?
Editor's note: In July, e-Discovery Law & Strategy presented the first part of this article. Here's the second half. In case you missed us last month, we've reprinted the top of the article here, and picked up at question 8. Click here for the first part, with questions 1 through 7.
As is often the case, the best way to understand the importance of a component in a process, whether the process or its elements are simple or complex, is to consider the consequences of that component's absence. In the case of e-discovery, miscommunication that might occur between an e-discovery provider and client can cause problems ranging from additional expense to collect and process electronic files properly to sanctions for failing to produce all relevant materials.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.