By Daniel Garrie / Law & Forensics LLC

Seeking information from social media accounts is becoming commonplace in litigation. Obtaining social media discovery, however, can pose significant challenges, as this information can take many forms, involve different file types, be generated by different users and be extremely voluminous. To avoid pitfalls, requesting parties should avoid blanket requests and be specific about the social media material they want and need. Likewise, responding parties should fully produce social media data responsive to a request, and fully document redacted or withheld material.

Scott v. United States Postal Service

The case of Scott v. United States Postal Service illustrates the importance of tailoring social media requests. Scott was a personal injury case. To help prove the lack of injury, the defendants moved to compel the production of “all postings related to any type of physical or athletic activities from June 6, 2014, to present on all social media websites, including, but not limited to Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.” The plaintiff objected that this request was “immaterial and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.” The court found that the information sought was relevant but agreed that the request was
Continue Reading Social Media E-Discovery: How to Request and Respond – Courts have provided guidance for litigators

By Rees Morrison / Altman Weil, Inc.

Many law departments use a request for proposal (RFP) to choose outside counsel to represent them in a major matter, for a portfolio of matters likely to start over a period of time or on a panel. Typical RFPs describe the bidding protocol, expectations of the department and background facts for the firms. These facts generally include work that will likely need to be done, the annual number of similar matters in the past, the distribution of law firms used, fees paid, outcomes achieved, etc. RFPs are a comfortable, familiar tool, often involving the procurement function, but they are quite often heavy on text.Continue Reading Improve RFPs With Data Analytics: Law departments and outside counsel both stand to benefit

COMPLIMENTARY WEBINAR
Title: IoT and Disparate Data: A Powerful Combination for Labor and Employment Cases
Date: Tuesday, May 16, 2017
Time: 1:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time

REGISTER HERE!

The IoT is here and the real question is no longer will its data affect litigation, but how can I use it in my current cases to provide a positive and meaningful impact to my clients.  Join Dan Regard and Charlie Platt of iDiscovery Solutions while they talk about how they have helped their clients use IoT and Disparate Data to communicate factual data and tell compelling stories. In this webinar, they will guide you through the basics as well as several case studies which leveraged this data to significant effect.

Continue Reading Complimentary Webinar: IoT and Disparate Data: A Powerful Combination for Labor and Employment Cases

By Veta T. Richardson / Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC)

Veta T. Richardson is the president and CEO of the Association of Corporate Counsel, based in Washington, D.C. Beginning in 2000, ACC has conducted extensive surveys of chief legal officers (which include law department leaders with various titles, including general counsel). Not long after the latest survey of 1,100 chief legal officers from 42 countries was released, she agreed to discuss what she reads in the results. The interview has been edited for style and length.Continue Reading Making Sense of the ACC Survey: Veta T. Richardson interprets what chief legal officers seem to be doing

By Thomas S. Markey / McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Privacy lawsuits, including consumer class actions and data breach cases, often live or die early in litigation when defendants seek dismissal based on plaintiffs’ lack of standing. In federal courts, where many privacy actions are filed, plaintiffs have standing only if they can establish a “personal stake” in the litigation.

In May 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a decision that attempted to clarify its interpretation of the federal standing doctrine. In the year since Spokeo, however, a split has emerged among federal appellate courts regarding standing in consumer class-action lawsuits. Recent federal court decisions interpreting Spokeo, along with the well-publicized disclosures of data breaches at Yahoo! Inc., offer insight into how companies can strengthen their cybersecurity programs and minimize their exposure to data breach liability.
Continue Reading Avoiding Consumer Class Actions after Spokeo: Courts are still struggling with the issue of standing

By Pamela D. Hans & Christina Yousef / Anderson Kill

 

A lawsuit of any magnitude can be devastating for your business, whether it manifests its hardship financially or otherwise. The stress of making the right decision for your company’s future can seem insurmountable at times. And just like that, a light at the end of the tunnel: a settlement offer that is reasonable and good for your business. The only problem is that your insurance company will not consent.
Continue Reading Policyholders’ Hands Are Strengthened When Insurance Companies Refuse to Settle: Appellate decisions on a California case suggest the tables may be turning

By Joe Calve, Metropolitan Corporate Counsel

Picture this. It’s the cavernous main ballroom at the Aria Hotel & Casino, just off the strip in Las Vegas. It’s an early Wednesday morning in late March, the last day of the annual meeting of the Legal Marketing Association. There’s a buzz of anticipation. It’s GC day!Continue Reading Backstory: What Stays in Vegas …

By Matthew Cohen, Michael Prounis and David White / AlixPartners LLP

There was a lot of talk this year at LegalTech about corporate legal departments bringing e-discovery in-house. The purported justifications for doing so are many, ranging from reduced costs and risks to increased control, efficiency and compliance. However, since the e-discovery lifecycle is very broad in scope, the real world benefits realized by bringing any particular components of that lifecycle can vary greatly from company to company. While most software vendors and resellers will have you believe that all your problems can be solved and your costs vastly reduced if you just implement their single magic solution, this is rarely the case. In order to realize actual returns, the decision to bring e-discovery in-house must be much more thoughtful and calculated, with a focus on actual needs, capacity and strategies. Deciding which aspects are suitable for internal management by any particular company requires a full understanding of the many different cost levers, the resources and expertise that each component requires and the pros and cons of doing it yourself versus outsourcing.Continue Reading Bringing E-Discovery In-House: It can make sense, but a legal department should carefully assess how much to do

By Greg Cancilla / RVM Enterprises, Inc.

All the attention cybersecurity has garnered recently makes it easy to forget that computer forensics goes back long before the days of Dropbox, thumb drives, BYOD and the cloud. The contrast is not lost on RVM’s Greg Cancilla, who got his start during a time that now feels like a bygone era. He sat down with MCC to deliver what turned out to be (among other things) a history lesson. The interview has been edited for length and style.Continue Reading After the Breach: When cybersecurity fails, forensics specialists come in to investigate the theft

By Deborah B. Dunie / National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD)

A former CTO of a Fortune 1000 company with significant government experience, Deborah B. Dunie has an enviable resume for board service. She discussed her work with the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) advisory services, which recently unveiled a suite of tools and educational offerings to help close the “cyberliteracy” gap on corporate boards. Her remarks have been edited for length and style. Continue Reading Plugging the Cyberliteracy Gap: In confronting enterprise risk, directors should focus on risk tolerance and liability, not threats