January 5, 2021
With the New Year upon us, it is worth looking back at some of the key eDiscovery cases from 2020 and examining the lessons they offer going forward in 2021.
December 16, 2020
A new case has brought into the spotlight the risks responding parties face when entering into ESI protocols with detailed disclosure obligations regarding technology-assisted review (“TAR”). In In re Valsartan, Losartan, and Irbesartan Products Liability Litigation (D.N.J. Dec. 2, 2020), the court refused to approve a responding party’s proposed TAR process and insisted that the design and execution of a TAR workflow required “an unprecedented degree of transparency” between the responding and requesting parties.
December 7, 2020
Driven, Inc. is delighted to announce that eDiscovery expert and technology-assisted review (TAR) specialist Kelly Atherton has joined its consulting services practice.
November 23, 2020
We are at the five-year mark of rules changes designed to emphasize proportionality in federal civil discovery practice. Since December 1, 2015, many courts have examined the six proportionality factors memorialized in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) to measure the appropriateness of discovery. Of those factors, cost—the expense and time required to comply with a discovery response—remains the most significant in terms of determining whether a responding party must comply with a disputed discovery request.
November 4, 2020
While most of America, and the world, have been focused on the U.S. Presidential election, voters in California have quietly approved the most sweeping privacy and data protection law in the United States. The California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA” or the “Act”) will be replacing the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) that just came into effect earlier this year.