Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Matters related to intellectual property ('IP') have become so common in our e-discovery and computer-forensics practice that when we tell our staff there's a new matter requiring our attention, the general response is typically: 'Let me guess ' another company where a former employee has left for a competitor or created a startup, and allegedly stole the company's key intellectual property to get a head start.' From that point, we delve into another adventure to hunt down the next smoking gun and, in some instances, the silver bullet.
Features
The author believes that the best e-discovery-review best practices should be characterized as the application of real-life lessons. He believes they are not complicated, and that focusing on a few of these learned lessons with a thoughtful, deliberate approach will achieve a truly effective electronic discovery review.
Features
Recent cases in e-commerce law and in the e-commerce industry.
Features
With a vendor partner now in place to help remove the headaches associated with managing a review database, you should have it made it the shade. Hold on! You're certainly on the right track, but the job doesn't end once the vendor is chosen. There are still a number of technical items that need to be considered about this review environment before you can turn your entire review team loose on the data. An engineering assessment of the review environment itself will go a long way in helping identify potential problems and risks early on as well as becoming the first step toward a successful overall review. Following is a short checklist that can aid in this assessment process.
Features
Attorneys have an ethical obligation to represent their clients zealously. Deposition preparation is key to that obligation. Preparing testifying witnesses educates and focuses them on important issues and facts of a case. This aside, the law regarding disclosure of work product provided to testifying witnesses is not well settled, and 'there is considerable room within which thoughtful judges can reach different conclusions.' <i>Intermedics, Inc. v. Ventritex, Inc.</i>, 139 F.R.D. 384, 387 (N.D. Cal. 1991). Zealous representation, therefore, requires counsel to walk a line between witness preparation on one side and work product disclosure on the other. In so doing, counsel must also remain mindful of the line that exists between acceptable witness preparation and impermissible influencing of a witness. <i>State v. Earp</i>, 571 A.2d 1227, 1235 (Md. 1990). One misstep may lead to disclosure of counsel's mental impressions and strategy and, possibly, to serious sanctions.
Features
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Features
There has been a great deal of publicity in the medical community about apology programs ' programs that encourage doctors to affirmatively admit medical mistakes to patients and their families. While there is a lot of support for the idea, there is also a good deal of controversy over whether these programs actually work to reduce litigation and the cost of medical malpractice claims. What, realistically, can apology programs do ' and what can they not do?
Features
Confidential physician peer reviews may be disclosed to plaintiffs in federal discrimination and antitrust cases in three federal circuits, even though all 50 states and the District of Columbia recognize a privilege against disclosure of the performance ratings. This growing federal-state divergence will make federal courts more attractive to plaintiffs filing civil rights suits involving doctors, attorneys say. At the same time, it may have a chilling effect on peer review participant candor and on the ability of health care facilities to recruit peer review team members.