BarbriSFCourseDetails

Course Details

This CLE course will discuss how counsel can objectively satisfy the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) duty to make reasonable inquiry into the client's discovery responses and thereby certify that the client has met its discovery obligations. The program will review what being "actively involved in discovery" means, as a practical matter; what it means to "follow up and validate;" and counsel's options if it cannot make the Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) certification.

Faculty

Description

Bad things can and often do happen when lawyers over delegate e-discovery responsibility to their clients or vendors. Courts continue to express concern and exasperation over the conduct of counsel and parties in discovery and their failure to meet their affirmative obligations to make reasonable efforts to find discoverable material and that discovery responses were complete and correct when made.

It can be difficult for counsel to draw bright-line distinctions between acceptable and unacceptable conduct in preserving information and in conducting discovery, but counsel is not without guidance.

This panel will provide concrete examples of the oft-given advice that counsel should be "actively involved" in discovery and then follow up and validate processes. The program will discuss the role and content of checklists and how to establish that counsel took those affirmative steps. The panel will also discuss key case law in this area.

Listen as this panel of experienced e-discovery attorneys and litigators demonstrates what counsel must do to meet the duty of reasonable inquiry.

Outline

  1. Counsel's duty to supervise client discovery
  2. Strategies for staying actively involved in discovery
  3. Strategies for validating client's searches and productions
  4. Strategies for when client performance falls short

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • Why do lawyers and parties continue to struggle with managing discovery?
  • What is "knowledge, information, and belief formed after a reasonable inquiry"?
  • What have courts identified as less than reasonable inquiry into a client's discovery undertakings and what are the possible consequences, including sanctions?
  • How can counsel overcome client objections to their involvement in discovery?