ABA Conference, Tampa, 2014

I am happy to be participating at the January ABA Conference, again. The conference is from January 28 (Tuesday) through January 31 (Friday), 2014.

Here’s information about the two panels I’m co-moderating.

Wednesday, 29 : 9:00 AM – 10:30AM – Judicial View on Recent ESI Decisions

Steven Teppler
Jon Stanley
Hon. John Facciola
Hon. Andrew Peck
Hon. Anthony Porcelli
Hon. Shira Scheindlin
Hon. Karla Spaulding

Do recent ESI decisions advance the general understanding of ESI or are they outliers? Are certain decisional authority trends developing? Will any decisions affect how organizations store and manage data, e.g. circuit split on use of CFAA? How will mobile, especially employee-owned, devices affect the scope of discovery? These are some of the critical issues this panel will address.

AND

Thursday, 30 : 2:30PM – 3:30PM

A Discussion of the FRCP Amendment Proposals

Lucy Thomson
Jon Stanley
Hon. John Facciola
Richard Marcus
Hon. Andrew Peck
Hon. Anthony Porcelli
Hon. Shira Scheindlin

In August, 2013, a package of proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was published for public comment. The package contains a variety of features. One is a proposal to replace Rule 37(e) with a new rule on sanctions for failure to preserve information. Other features include a recalibration of the scope of discovery in Rule 26(b)(1), explicit inclusion of preservation in the Rule 16 scheduling order, and references to Fed. R. Evid. 502’s provisions for agreements guarding against privilege waiver. Proposed amendments would also amend Rule 26(c) to provide explicit authority for a protective order allocating the costs of discovery. Others would revise provisions on the numerical limits for interrogatories and depositions. In addition, revisions to Rule 34 would require that objections to discovery requests be stated with specificity, and state whether any responsive materials are actually being withheld on the basis of the objection. Rule 34 amendments would also direct that the responding party state when production will be completed. This panel of distinguished jurists and a Reporter of the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules will discuss the anticipated impact of the proposed changes if accepted.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.