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 explores courtroom staging—how movement, spatial awareness, posture, and pre...
Attorneys will receive a comparative analysis of GAAP and IFRS with emphasis on cross-border legal c...
Synthetic identity fraud creates a significant legal and compliance challenge for professionals by c...
Part 1 - This program focuses specifically on cross?examining expert witnesses, whose credentials an...
This session highlights the legal and compliance implications of divergences between GAAP and IFRS. ...
The False Claims Act continues to be the federal Government’s number one fraud fighting tool. ...
This CLE program examines attorneys’ ethical duties in managing electronically stored informat...
Whether from poor drafting, conflicting case law, or simply the amounts in dispute, certain key cont...
Large World Models (LWMs)— the next generation of AI systems capable of generating...
This presentation examines how “sense memory,” a core acting technique, can help lawyers...