Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
U.S. Judicial Conference Approves FRCP e-Discovery Amendments
The Judicial Conference of the United States forwarded the rule changes to the Supreme Court without discussion or question, a federal courts spokeswoman told e-Discovery Law & Strategy.
The Supreme Court has until May 1 to approve the changes. A spokesman for the federal courts said the High Court would probably approve the amendments in mid-April. After the Supreme Court's approval, the modified rules would take effect Dec. 1, 2006, unless Congress intervenes with statutory changes.
Rules pertaining to electronic discovery listed on the approved consent calendar were:
' 16;
' 26(a);
' 26(b)(2);
' 26(b)(5);
' 26(f);
' 33;
' 34;
' 37(f);
' 45;
' 50; and
' Form 35.
The changes, under discussion in legal circles for several years because of developments in technology used in evidence storage, discovery and presentation, come after extensive public comment, including two hearings this year.
The amendments concern the definition, identification, disclosure, interrogatories pertaining to, format and other aspects of evidence in electronic form.
Chief judges of U.S. circuits, and the Court of International Trade, compose the U.S. Judicial Conference. Normally, the Chief Justice presides, but Associate Justice John Paul Stevens is overseeing the conference since Chief Justice William Rehnquist died last month.
For more on the amendments, see, these articles in e-Discovery Law & Strategy:
' 'Better Late Than Never ' Proposed Amendments to Rules of Civil Procedure Address e-Discovery' (October 2004);
' 'Civil Rules Committee Approves e-Discovery Changes, In Principle' (May 2005); and
' 'Inside The Rules ' A Practical Approach To The Proposed FRCP Rules Concerning e-Discovery' (August 2005).
' Michael Lear-Olimpi
On September 20, the panel of federal judges that sets policy for U.S. Courts approved amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that address electronic evidence.
The Judicial Conference of the United States forwarded the rule changes to the Supreme Court without discussion or question, a federal courts spokeswoman told e-Discovery Law & Strategy.
The Supreme Court has until May 1 to approve the changes. A spokesman for the federal courts said the High Court would probably approve the amendments in mid-April. After the Supreme Court's approval, the modified rules would take effect Dec. 1, 2006, unless Congress intervenes with statutory changes.
Rules pertaining to electronic discovery listed on the approved consent calendar were:
' 16;
' 26(a);
' 26(b)(2);
' 26(b)(5);
' 26(f);
' 33;
' 34;
' 37(f);
' 45;
' 50; and
' Form 35.
The changes, under discussion in legal circles for several years because of developments in technology used in evidence storage, discovery and presentation, come after extensive public comment, including two hearings this year.
The amendments concern the definition, identification, disclosure, interrogatories pertaining to, format and other aspects of evidence in electronic form.
Chief judges of U.S. circuits, and the Court of International Trade, compose the U.S. Judicial Conference. Normally, the Chief Justice presides, but Associate Justice John Paul Stevens is overseeing the conference since Chief Justice William Rehnquist died last month.
For more on the amendments, see, these articles in e-Discovery Law & Strategy:
' 'Better Late Than Never ' Proposed Amendments to Rules of Civil Procedure Address e-Discovery' (October 2004);
' 'Civil Rules Committee Approves e-Discovery Changes, In Principle' (May 2005); and
' 'Inside The Rules ' A Practical Approach To The Proposed FRCP Rules Concerning e-Discovery' (August 2005).
' Michael Lear-Olimpi
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?