Since 2006, when amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure addressed discovery of electronically stored information (ESI), lawyers have known they can no longer ignore e-discovery. Attorneys have mastered the litigation-hold memo and are well versed in search methodology, native production and custodians. They even know the difference between a TIFF and a PST.
More often than not, in 2012, attorneys come to a Rule 26(f) conference prepared. They know a client’s information-technology infrastructure; they know that asking for backup tapes can sometimes be more of a curse than a blessing; and they even know that discussions about cost-shifting in production of information should occur on the front end of the case rather than the back end.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
