Compliance » Recent Developments In E-Discovery Case Law

Recent Developments In E-Discovery Case Law

Flat design style modern vector illustration concept of businessman in stylish suit using mobile phone or digital tablet for business process organization, lifestyle routine, internet browsing and other tasks. Isolated on white background

April 29, 2015

In the April edition of Sidley Austin’s monthly summary, Judge Peck in the Southern District of New York sheds light on the protocol for judicial review of technology assisted review (“TAR”), specifically regarding the issue of disclosure of the seed set used to train review software. A case in the Northern District of Illinois addresses the question of what counts as electronic discovery cost for purposes of quantifying recovery by the prevailing party, and an Eastern District of New York case addresses the question of when a sample of cell phone records and Facebook account information, as opposed to the whole motherload, would be sufficient. And in a Florida case, a magistrate judge rules that the expense of forensic examination of a damaged computer is not warranted because the request for it was “simply an instance of the defendant believing ‘there is something more to find.'” Without more detail, the judge said, that wasn’t good enough.

Read full article at:

Share this post: