Tag: NEWS & UPDATES

1
Da Silva Moore: Defendant Opposes Plaintiffs’ Objections to May 7 Discovery Rulings
2
Da Silva Moore: Plaintiffs File Objections to Discovery Rulings
3
ABA Working Group Issues Interim Report on e-Discovery in Bankruptcy Cases
4
New Jersey Considers e-Discovery Rules for Criminal Cases
5
More Happenings in Da Silva Moore
6
Da Silva Moore: Plaintiffs File Reply in Support of Motion for Recusal or Disqualification
7
From The Sedona Conference®: a Commentary on Ethics & Metadata
8
Defendant Files Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal
9
Plaintiffs File Formal Motion for Recusal or Disqualification in Da Silva Moore
10
More in Da Silva Moore: Magistrate Judge Peck Responds to Request for Recusal

Da Silva Moore: Plaintiffs File Objections to Discovery Rulings

On May 21, Plaintiffs filed Rule 72(a) objections to Magistrate Judge Peck’s May 7, 2012 discovery rulings related to the relevance of certain documents that comprise the seed set of the parties’ ESI protocol.  Plaintiffs’ brief and supporting declaration are available below:

 

ABA Working Group Issues Interim Report on e-Discovery in Bankruptcy Cases

In March, the American Bar Association’s Electronic Discovery [ESI] in Bankruptcy Working Group issued its Interim Report on Electronic Discovery Issues in Bankruptcy Cases.  The Working Group “was formed to study and prepare guidelines or a best practices report on the scope and timing of a party’s obligation to preserve electronically stored information (ESI) in bankruptcy cases” and has prepared preliminary guidelines in three bankruptcy-related subject areas: “(i) large Chapter 11 cases; (ii) middle market and smaller Chapter 11 cases; and (iii) Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 cases.”  Those preliminary guidelines are appended to the Interim Report, which was issued to “invite and stimulate comments from a wider audience.”  Thus, readers are encouraged to review the report, available here, and to submit comments to the Working Group using the contact information provided.

New Jersey Considers e-Discovery Rules for Criminal Cases

In April 2009, Chief Justice Rabner of the Supreme Court of New Jersey appointed the Supreme Court Special Committee on Discovery in Criminal and Quasi-Criminal Matters (hereinafter the Committee).  The Committee “was appointed to recommend solutions to a variety of issues that had arisen as the result of the increasing use of electronically stored information in criminal cases.”  After significant investigation, the Committee has recently reported its recommendations, which include both proposed amendments to several rules as well as “non-rule recommendations.”

Issues identified for serious consideration by the Committee included many that are familiar to practitioners on the “civil side,” such as problems with incompatibility between the format of production and the equipment/software available to defense counsel, discovery related costs, and discovery-related delays as well as problems that are unique to criminal cases, including issues related to attorney-client visitation in county jails, for example.  With so many issues to consider, the resulting report and recommendations are significant and too sweeping to succinctly summarize.  For those who want to learn more, however, a copy of the full report is available here.

Additionally, for those who are interested, comments on the proposals are invited; the deadline for submission is June 4. 

More Happenings in Da Silva Moore

It seems every day brings something new in this case.  Today we report that on Monday, May 14, Magistrate Judge Peck entered an order staying MSL’s production of ESI, “pending Judge Carter’s decision on plaintiffs’ motions for collective action certification and to amend their complaint.”  That order is available here.

Also of interest, on Tuesday, May 15, Magistrate Judge Peck denied a motion from Richard E. Flamm, Esq. to file an amicus brief in support of plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification.  The motion, the underlying amicus brief, and the court’s order are available below:

Read More

Da Silva Moore: Plaintiffs File Reply in Support of Motion for Recusal or Disqualification

On May 10, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their reply in support of their motion for recusal or disqualification. Those pleadings are available below.

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification

Declaration of Steven L. Wittels in Support of Plaintiffs’ Reply in Support of Plaintiffs’’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification 
 

From The Sedona Conference®: a Commentary on Ethics & Metadata

In March, The Sedona Conference® released a public comment version of its latest publication: Commentary on Ethics & Metadata.  The commentary is the first “to move beyond [Working Group 1’s] previously exclusive focus on aspects of discovery or records management/preservation” and focuses on ethical obligations surrounding metadata in both the discovery and non-discovery context.

The commentary is available for download from The Sedona Conference®, here.

Plaintiffs File Formal Motion for Recusal or Disqualification in Da Silva Moore

On Friday April 13, 2012, Plaintiffs in this matter filed a formal motion for recusal or disqualification, following up on their prior, informal request for the same.

• A copy of the Notice of Motion for Recusal or Disqualification is available here.
• A copy of the Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification is available here.
• A copy of the Declaration of Steven L. Wittels in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Recusal or Disqualification (without exhibits attached) is available here.  Exhibits are available on PACER (http://www.pacer.gov/)

Copyright © 2018, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.