Early Case Assessment is a popular concept among e-discovery types because, among other things, it showcases how ESI can make litigation more efficient.  What is Early Case Assessment?  Although definitions vary widely, it basically describes any effort to understand the facts and the law of a case early enough that well-informed decisions about important issue like staffing, budget, strategy, and settlement, can be made before a significant investment is made in the case.  It is promoted by corporate clients who are tired of asking outside counsel what a case is likely to cost or whether to settle and getting the standard “it is too early to tell” answer.  Based on experience I believe that focusing on email as part of the factual investigation piece of the early case assessment is the way to go.  I just put together this white paper for Smarsh, Inc., a Portland company that is a leader in hosted email archiving, making the case for using a product like theirs in Early Case Assessment.  More to come on the intersection of e-discovery and Early Case Assessment…

It was a Friday evening, and I was worn out from a long week investigating and then filing a motion for a temporary restraining order in an out-of-state trade secrets dispute. My client was steamed, and eager to pounce on the opponent. Naturally coming home didn’t stop my mind from working continuously, reexamining facts, law, and what I could have done differently in our very aggressive briefing. As I was rocking my infant daughter to sleep and I started to relax, my mind became more contemplative, and I realized that perhaps, perhaps I should have taken some steps that some might call “collaborative” instead of assuming the worst about the other side and its counsel…

Read more

 

After several years of drafting, debate, and hold-ups due to the budget situation, California’s state-court rules on electronic discovery have finally been signed into law. The rules, which make up the California Electronic Discovery Act (CEDA, also sometimes referred to as AB5) are largely modeled on the e-discovery provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and also on the Uniform Rules Relating to the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information promulgated by the National Conference of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws.

Much has already been written in the way of commentary on these new rules, both in blogs and publically disseminated law firm publications. This post, like the “historiographies” that I read in college – collecting and commenting on what had been written on a particular historical event – tries to capture the best of the commentary so far on the key features, failings, and anticipated impact of AB5.

Read more

• Brought to you by

  • 

• Contributors

  • Katherine Heekin
    The Heekin Law Firm
    
  • Anton Litchfield
    Encore
    
  • Mark Costigan
    U of O
    
  • Paul French
    Bridge City Legal, Inc.
    
  • Seth Row - Litigator & E-Discovery Consultant
    

• Recently Written

  • Orders and Opinions
  • Multimedia
  • Early Case Assessments Using Hosted Email Archiving
  • Proper Choice of Seating For Your E-Discovery Meet and Confer
  • A “Blog-iography”: Best of Commentary on New California State-Court E-Discovery Rules
  • E-Discovery and eCompliance
  • I’ll Put My GPS Up Against Your Radar Any Day

• Archives

  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • September 2008

• Resources

  • ABA Standards of Civil Discovery
  • Applied Discovery
  • Arkfeld
  • Discovery Resources
  • E-Discovery Knowledge Center
  • E-Discovery Law
  • EDRM
  • Federal Rules
  • Ken Withers
  • Kroll
  • Ralph Losey
  • Ride the Lightning
  • State Rules