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.
Protect your practice from the ethical vulnerabilities of AI by mastering Model Rules 1.1 and 1.5. T...
AI, an innovative technology that was once a supporting act for digital transformation, business str...
This program examines the strategic use of expert testimony in immigration court proceedings. Partic...
The landscape of global finance is undergoing a seismic shift as traditional assets migrate to the b...
This course will provide a detailed overview of the Medicare Secondary Payer act as well as provide ...
This program introduces psychosocial evaluations as a valuable tool in civil litigation, particularl...
‘A Lawyer’s Guide To Mental Fitness’ is a seminar designed to equip professionals ...
This program, conducted by a seasoned litigation and trial lawyer, will emphasize what litigators ca...
Most legal professionals are operating in survival mode whether they realize it or not. Not crisis-l...
The “Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countrie...