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.
This presentation provides a basic overview of AI governance in the United States for in-house attor...
Objections are among the most powerful — and most misunderstood — tools in a trial lawye...
"Artificial Intelligence and the Practice of Law" (updated through 2026), is a 50-slide primer desig...
AI tools are advancing faster than legal organizations can absorb them. This program examines why th...
The practice of law places legal professionals under extraordinary and often chronic stress, making ...
This program provides a practical roadmap to mastering every stage of the discovery process in civil...
This course on trade secrets litigation provides real-world best practices through all key stages of...
Lawyers lose hundreds of billable and operational hours every year to poorly managed meetings. Unfoc...
If there is one word we continue to hear more than any other term as we continue to navigate through...
AI agents — autonomous systems capable of planning, deciding, and acting independently across ...