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 Twelfth Juror: Lessons on Jury Selection from a Trial Lawyer’s Novel and a Trial Consultan...
Adverse and derogatory information often has devastating effects on a contractor's ability to win co...
During this course, you will learn about best practices and strategies for retaining intellectual pr...
Modern mediation increasingly brings together parties, counsel, and neutrals across a broad range of...
New York City’s new Non-Primary Residence Property Surcharge—commonly known as the pied-...
As the largest purchaser of goods and services in the world, the United States Government requires f...
The Aftermath of Scams and Cybercrime: A Practical Guide to Response and Recovery examines the immed...
This program provides a practical roadmap to mastering every stage of the discovery process in civil...
Every trial lawyer has experienced it: the inner critic before opening statements, the surge of ange...
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) and other digital-native structures have moved from ni...