Skip to main content

2017 eDiscovery Case Law Update: Six Cases You Need to Know

June 7, 2017  |  1 min read

2017 Caselaw WP Feature Image

Six months into 2017, is it too early for an eDiscovery case law year in review? Hell no. With eDiscovery law evolving every day, six months might almost be too long to wait.

Plenty of notable developments have taken place between January and June. First, the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure continue to be felt throughout discovery practice, particularly around issues of proportionality.

That’s a welcome change, and one that’s being pared with other amendment-related corrective action.

Take boilerplate objections, for example. With well over a year having passed since Rule 34 was amended to require specific reasons for discovery objections, judges are now demanding, at the top of their lungs, that practitioners take these changes seriously. We’re talking all-caps “GET IT TOGETHER OR ELSE” warnings here.

Then there are the eDiscovery cybersecurity developments, particularly one case where a party uploaded confidential documents to the internet without any limitation on who could access them. The party had, as the court put it, engaged in “the cyber world equivalent of leaving the claim file on a bench in the public square and telling its counsel where they could find it.” A link to those unsecured files was then shared with the opposing party during discovery and, well, disaster ensued.

These are just a few of the notable developments from the year so far. We’ve rounded up the six most important eDiscovery cases and distilled them down to six actionable lessons -- with a few surprise bonus lessons as well. You can find them all in Logikcull's new white paper “2017 eDiscovery Case Law Update: Six Cases You Need to Know.” 

Case Law Update WP.png