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.
The legal landscape in the United States has been significantly influenced by the rapid technologica...
In this program we will discuss all facets of the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSP) including: reim...
A former complex litigation judge suggests winning strategies for making lawsuits faster and less ex...
This course will help you deal with clients, opposing counsel, and the courts in a professional mann...
International commercial arbitration allows parties from different national backgrounds to, by conse...
Few parts of the discovery process are more intimidating than deposing an expert witness. Profession...
When lawyers represent clients in litigation, those lawyers assume the role of advocate. Of course, ...
“Everyone tells me I’m doing a great job. My clients, my colleagues, my family. Why do I...
As any of the recent legal news stories about artificial intelligence clarify, the legal world becom...
This Continuing Legal Education presentation covers electronic discovery and the related ethical dut...