Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Better Late Than Never
In response to the pervasive discovery of electronic information, and at the urging of the bar and the bench, the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure recently published for comment several proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).
This welcome proposal has been a long time coming. For years, litigants have struggled with discovering and producing electronic information. Many organizations have undertaken monumental efforts and incurred significant costs trying to meet unclear discovery obligations. Others settle merely to avoid the complex issue altogether. The lack of clear or consistent guidance in the FRCP and in well-developed case law exacerbates the issue, especially for large and medium companies that operate and litigate in multiple jurisdictions. As the Advisory Committee on the FRCP (the Committee) explained in its Report of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee:
As electronic discovery becomes more and more common, the burdens and costs of complying with unclear and consistent discovery obligations, which vary from district to district in ways unwarranted by local variations in practice, will also increase.
Many questions arise when electronic information is sought in litigation, such as:
- What is the scope of the request?
- Where is the responsive information located?
- How can the responsive information be collected?
- How can the responsive information be reviewed to ensure preservation of applicable privileges?
- How will the responsive information be produced?
- How can the production be supplemented for responsive day-forward data?
- How is all potentially responsive information preserved to ensure it is not deleted?
These variables are not unique to e-discovery, but they are significantly complicated by the magnitude and character of electronic information. The sheer volume of electronic information makes discovery more burdensome – more information is potentially discoverable with electronic data than with paper. As the Committee recognized, “Large corporate computer networks create backup data measured in terabytes, or 1,000,000 megabytes: each terabyte represents the equivalent of 500 billion pages of plain text.” (See, Report of the Civil Rules Advisory Committee, 3, quoting The Manual for Complex Litigation, 4th, '11.446.) Complicating matters more, electronic information can be stored in a wide variety of locations and formats, such as network storage devices, workstations, laptops, backup tapes, personal digital assistants and cell phones. The unintentional creation, modification or deletion of electronic information through the actions of opening or moving a file, or turning a computer on or off, also challenges those involved in e-discovery efforts.
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.