BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack
BarbriPdBannerMessage

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    Live Online with Live Q&A

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

    Intermediate

  • work Practice Area

    Class Action and Other Litigation

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Wednesday, November 12, 2025

  • 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.


  • Live Online


    On Demand

$297.00

This course is $0 with these passes:

CLE
ALL

This CLE course will provide attendees with practical guidance for complying with the mandatory requirement that discovery plans include the parties' views and proposals about the timing and method for complying with Rule 26(b)(5)(A) and on preparing and producing below budget privilege logs that will not draw valid objections. The panelists will discuss the key components of a log, negotiating less onerous logging requirements, metadata, categorical logs, and identifying flaws in adversaries' privilege logs, as well as how technology can reduce cost, improve quality, and prevent privilege waiver.

Faculty

Daniel B. Garrie
Founder and Managing Partner
Law & Forensics LLC

Mr. Garrie is the Founder and Managing Partner of Law & Forensics LLC, a specialized legal engineering firm with a focus on cybersecurity, digital forensics, and e-discovery. Since co-founding Law & Forensics LLC in 2008, he has made it into a leading boutique cybersecurity, cryptocurrency, blockchain, and forensic engineering firm. Additionally, Mr. Garrie has successfully built and sold several technology start-ups companies. As a licensed attorney with a Bachelor’s and Master’s in Computer Science, Mr. Garrie has been a dominant voice in computer forensics, cybersecurity, and e-discovery for over 20 years. He has testified as a computer forensic, cybersecurity, and e-discovery expert witness and served as a discovery referee, forensic neutral, mediator, and special master at JAMS (https://www.jamsadr.com/garrie/) in hundreds of State and Federal Courts, administrative proceedings, and arbitrations. His ability to conduct meticulous investigations and articulate complex technical findings in a manner comprehensible to legal professionals and juries alike has made him an invaluable asset in litigation. Currently, Mr. Garrie is the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) at Zeichner Ellman & Krause LLP, demonstrating his prowess in real-world security operations. He has served as a consultant for multiple companies, where he spearheaded efforts to fortify security infrastructures, mitigating risks, and cyber incident response. Mr. Garrie has authored and implemented security policies and procedures adhering to industry practices and regulatory mandates.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Joseph C. Leonard
Attorney
Morris James LLP

Mr. Leonard provides legally compliant, cost-efficient eDiscovery advice and support in complex corporate and commercial litigation and transactions. With a career spanning decades in eDiscovery, he is an invaluable asset to clients facing complex litigation or major corporate transactions. Mr. Leonard's knowledge of the nuances of digital evidence and information governance, together with his experience dealing with Delaware rules and requirements, gives clients a distinctive advantage in case or deal strategy. He collaborates with clients’ legal and IT departments, outside technology vendors, and attorneys across our firm to provide start-to-finish litigation management. Mr. Leonard has extensive experience providing astute legal advice on internal investigations, data breaches, electronic discovery, and document retention. He also manages large-scale and complex document review projects.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

Unless the parties stipulate otherwise, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(5)(A) mandates that when withholding an otherwise discoverable document on the grounds of privilege or other protection, responding parties must assert the basis for withholding the document and provide sufficient information to assess that claim. But within those general requirements lies substantial room for interpretation. This webinar will share best practices for generating logs that satisfy governing obligations without engaging in a costly, fully manual exercise prone to error.

The best place to start is well before the first privilege log entry is drafted, and this is now required under amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3)(D), which expressly requires agreements on "issues about claims of privilege" as part of the meet-and-confer process. The parties are advised to take advantage of this opportunity to exempt whole categories of documents from logging.

Jumping ahead, counsel should serve a privilege log only after a thorough quality control screening to identify third parties that could cause a privilege waiver. Diligent opposing counsel will scrutinize privilege logs closely.

Listen as the panel discusses these and many other strategies for avoiding costly privilege log mistakes that frustrate courts and sidetrack parties from the merits.

Outline

I. Introduction (purpose/importance of privilege logs)

II. Governing rules and amended Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3)(D)

III. Key privilege log components

IV. Negotiating less onerous/narrower logging requirements

A. Redactions

B. Partially privileged documents

C. Email threads

D. Post-complaint communications with outside counsel

V. Privilege log types

A. Traditional (document by document)

B. Categorical

C. Automated/metadata

VI. QC strategies

VII. Ways to leverage technology

VIII. Recent cases on privilege log objections and sanctions/waiver

Benefits

The panel will review these and other issues:

  • What categories of documents should ordinarily be negotiated out of privilege logs?
  • How can technology be deployed to efficiently create internally consistent privilege logs?
  • When are metadata and/or categorical privilege logs appropriate?
  • What best practices can be gleaned from recent cases, particularly when responding to objections and seeking to avoid waiver or other sanctions?