This month’s summaries produced a lot of interesting cases and also told me one thing; it’s still mostly about ignorance. Companies – and the firms that represent them – are continuing to get into hot water because they either don’t know the rules, or don’t comply with them when they do.
A couple of themes became apparent, so I’m using four cases (two each) to address the areas of privilege and native formats.
IT’S MY PRIVILEGE TO DEPOSE YOU
However, the judge didn’t see it that way and took into account new rule 502(b)(1) (new as of 9/14/08) and focused on the factors of mistaken production and the reasonable steps taken to correct it.
Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68128 (D.N.J. Aug. 4, 2009) – I don’t care what document is at issue; even a litigation hold letter as in the facts in this case. Claims of privilege and/or work product doctrine notwithstanding, if it’s relevant to the proceedings it may become fair game. Act accordingly.
THE NATIVES ARE GETTING RESTLESS
Metadata is not one of those terms I repeat often for entertainment value. When relevant, it can make or break a case.
Be careful when you wade into those legal waters…
[Has anyone else noticed that I use a lot of metaphors that involve H2O? What’s that about???]