The new paradigms of e-discovery and cost-shifting: determining who pays for electronic discovery.
Defense Counsel Journal › Vol. 72 Nbr. 3, July 2005
Linked as:
Defense Counsel Journal › Vol. 72 Nbr. 3, July 2005
Linked as:Extract
The new paradigms of e-discovery and cost-shifting: determining who pays for electronic discovery.
FEDERAL Rule of Civil Procedure 34 has permitted discovery of electronic information since 1970, but the volume of electronic documents has grown exponentially during the Internet revolution in which we live. (1) Today, the vast majority of documents exist in the form of emails, word processing documents, or spreadheets, and one estimate indicates that ninety-five percent of all documents are now created electronically. (2) In 2004, an estimated thirty billion emails were sent daily, and in 2006, the number is expected to double. Because digitally-stored data takes up significantly less space than paper, over seventy percent of electronic information is currently stored on laptops, cell phones, voice mail servers, personal digital assistants (PDAs), and backup tapes rather than in document warehouses.
Computerized data is discoverable if it is relevant. (3) Discovery of electronic documents is a relatively simple matter when the information requested is readily accessible. However, discovery becomes problematic when electronic information is no longer available by merely recalling it, but requires special programming tools or experts to extract it from its stored location into a useable format. The cost of identifying, gathering, reviewing for privilege, and producing electronic documents is high. For example, in one case, the cost of recovering data was estimated at $9.75 million. (4) These astronomical expenses stem from the sheer magnitude and redundancy of data on backup tapes. (5) Prior to the dominance of today's computer age, cost sharing in discovery was not a very dynamic topic. Several cases had addressed the issue, creating a solid body of common law from which to draw guidelines. Now, however, technology has created new paradigms for discovery, and it is redefining modern litigation strategies and tactics. The scope of electronically recorded information is considerably broader than most people recognize. (6) This process is evolving rapidly as new technologies, their use, misuse, and abuse give rise to new causes of action and remedies. Because of the potential costs associated with many electronic discovery requests, cost-shifting is one of the most hotly contested issues in electronic discovery. The issue regarding who pays for electronic discovery is unsettled, inconsistent, and highly case-specific. (7) Several judicial approaches have been applied to decide whether the cost of production is shifted to the requesting party. The law of electronic discovery is beginning to emerge, but most issues are so unexplored that judges must still develops the majority of the law in this area. (8) Electronic discovery technology i...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other documents:
barrett et al v slagle commissioner et al. 214 ga 650 106 s.e.2.d 908 1958 | Exxon Mobil Corp v Saudi Basic Industries Corp. 544 U.S ___ 2005 | USA vs Delgado-Castillo 5th Cir 2002 | 40 CFR 271.16 - Requirements for enforcement authority. | Sentencia nº 2313 de Consiglio di Stato May 08 2009 | Sentencia nº 6591 de Consiglio di Stato December 15 2008 | Sentencia nº 5515 de Consiglio di Stato November 04 2009 | Delación de la hereditasy de la bonorum possessio