BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Class Action and Other Litigation

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Tuesday, March 12, 2024

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE course will address a litigant's pursuit of discovery regarding an adversary's efforts to search for, locate, preserve, and collect relevant ESI (a/k/a "discovery on discovery" or "process-directed discovery"), including (1) the interplay between cooperation and transparency in discovery; (2) recent judicial decisions addressing requests for discovery on discovery; and (3) practical advice for avoiding discovery on discovery and strategic considerations for the potential offensive use of discovery on discovery.

Faculty

Helen Geib
Of Counsel
Hoover Hull Turner, LLP

Ms. Geib is Of Counsel for Hoover Hull Turner LLP. Her deep knowledge of eDiscovery law and practice was gained over many years of experience as a litigator and eDiscovery consultant. Ms. Geib has published numerous articles on topics in eDiscovery and legal technology for a wide variety of publications. In 2019, she was recognized as eDiscovery Professional of the Year by the Indianapolis Bar Association. Ms. Geib obtained her JD, summa cum laude, from The John Marshall Law School and is a member of the bar of the State of Indiana and the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. She serves on the board of the Women in eDiscovery Indianapolis chapter, which she launched in 2017.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Gregory English
Attorney
Hoover Hull Turner, LLP

Mr. English is an associate with Hoover Hull Turner LLP. He practices in the area of commercial litigation.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Riley H. Floyd
Attorney
Hoover Hull Turner, LLP

Mr. Floyd is an associate with Hoover Hull Turner LLP. He has developed meaningful trial experience by examining witnesses and deposing adverse parties. Mr. Floyd has also argued critical motions in state and federal courts. He practices in the areas of commercial litigation, lawyer liability and licensing, white collar defense, investigations, and crisis management.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

Much has been written about the expectation of cooperation between parties in litigation. And while cooperation is required in the discovery context, there is no such requirement that litigants be transparent as to how they responded to discovery requests. Counsel should be vigilant in recognizing improper attempts by another party to extend the concept of discovery by demanding transparency.

Most courts will not permit discovery on discovery in the absence of a showing that the responding party acted in bad faith or unlawfully withheld documents. Indeed, courts have routinely denied requests for discovery on discovery based on the requesting party's "mere speculation" that the responding party has acted improperly in responding to discovery. A requesting party may support a request for discovery on discovery by demonstrating an adequate factual basis, including inconsistencies with the responding party's production, deposition testimony establishing the failure of a party to implement a litigation hold in a timely manner, and/or the absence of documents from key custodians and/or date ranges in a production.

Listen as this experienced panel of litigators addresses discovery on discovery and discusses how to prevent discovery on discovery from derailing the merits of the case, as well as the offensive use of discovery on discovery in potential motions for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) or state equivalents.

Outline

  1. The challenges of seeking discovery on discovery
    1. Sedona Conference Principles 3 and 6
    2. Presumption that the responding party is best situated to respond to discovery
    3. Judicial treatment of requests for discovery on discovery
    4. Baseline showings needed to pursue discovery on discovery
  2. Effective use of ESI protocols
  3. Objections to discovery on discovery
    1. Relevance/proportionality
    2. Privilege objections
    3. Potential waiver of privilege if producing privileged information
  4. Motions to compel
    1. Cooperation and attempts to meet and confer
    2. Establishing strong factual records
    3. Burden of proof
  5. Potential sanctions

Benefits

The panel will review these and other critical issues regarding discovery on discovery:

  • The importance of cooperation and ESI protocols in avoiding discovery on discovery
  • The potential for offensive use of discovery on discovery and strategic considerations surrounding when/if a litigant may seek discovery on discovery
  • The potential discoverability of litigation holds
  • The importance of preparing and formulating a defensible discovery plan