Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Preparing for an FRCP 'Meet and Confer'
In today's litigious environment, both law firms and corporations are under mounting pressure to be much more proactive and process oriented when managing electronic discovery requests. This need is further compounded by the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that went into effect on December 1.
The intent of the new amendments is for cases to run smoother and focus on the merits rather than on the electronic discovery process. With the new elements in the 'meet and confer' conference requirement, counsel is now expected to understand its client's information infrastructure in order to negotiate what material will be disclosed, how it will be produced and in what timeframe. If either party has concerns about preservation, costs or burden, this is the time that these arguments need to be raised. The amendments also include a good faith and reasonableness 'safe harbor' provision that may protect the client in the event potentially relevant evidence is not preserved due to unintentional conduct. Most alarming is that all of this discussion and a good part of this activity, under FRCP Rule 26(f), must take place and be presented to the court within 120 days of lawsuits being served in federal court.
The primary concern that has surfaced from the recent rule changes is the underlying need to know what's really required to prepare for the new 'meet and confer.' While every case is different, one resounding theme rings true ' e-discovery is a process enabled by technology. Technologies, such as e-mail archiving systems, search tools and case management systems, can help legal teams preserve, find and manage electronic evidence. It takes a combination of people, processes and technologies to defensibly and effectively prepare for the new 'meet and confer.'
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.