Courts and parties have been dealing with discovery overuse for decades. The advisory committee notes to both the 1983 and 2015 revisions to Rule 26 reference the problem of over-discovery and encourage judges to be more aggressive in identifying and discouraging discovery overuse. Have courts been more aggressive in discouraging discovery overuse? Have parties since the 2015 revisions to Rule 26 been inclined to follow Rule 1’s instruction to employ the Federal Rules to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action?
This webinar will review recent case opinions in which courts have independently revised overbroad discovery. The presenters will also provide their views on relevance and proportionality considerations in discovery and assessing the risk of court revisions to discovery requests.
Class action litigation continues to evolve rapidly in response to an innovative plaintiffs’ b...
This follow?on CLE builds on National Security & Data Privacy: Complying with the Bulk Data...
Recent studies have shown that there has been a dramatic increase in impairment due to alcoholism, a...
Discussion of religion and reasonable accommodation in the workplace. Thanks to the United States Su...
AI agents and generative AI tools are rapidly entering law firm workflows, including legal research,...
This interactive course is designed to equip legal professionals with the knowledge, tools, and stra...
The Protections and Limits of the First Amendment when it comes to Expressive Conduct. This PowerPoi...
The “Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countrie...
This program examines the strategic use of expert testimony in immigration court proceedings. Partic...
This course will provide a detailed overview of the Medicare Secondary Payer act as well as provide ...