1 of 1 available systemwide,
with no current holds.
Location and Availability
|
Burton Barr Central Library
— 1 of 1 available
|
| |
Call Number |
Status |
| |
347.73502 P2814d
|
On Shelf
- (Checked in: Jan 27 2013 )
|
Notes:
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Contents:
- The revolution in discovery
- The rise and consequent miniaturization of the computer
- The connectivity revolution
- The new digital realm of information
- The new information complex
- The impact on the practice of law
- The response of the rule makers
- Meet the new rules
- The new concept of electronically stored information and recognition that information exists within enveloping systems
- The form of information is dynamic
- Conforming amendment to rule 33(d)
- Early attention to e-discovery matters, disclosures
- The new concept of accessibility
- The new retrieval procedure
- The safe harbor
- Changes to rule 45
- Brief background on the rule amendment process
- The process for amending the rules
- The standing committee and the judicial conference
- The Supreme Court and congressional review
- Where we are now in the process
- Preservation of evidence and sanctions for spoliation
- Public commentary on publication draft
- Legal background on the duty to preserve evidence
- The reasonableness standard
- Tailoring by means of rule 26
- E-mail
- Backup tapes
- Metadata
- Parties must take affirmative steps to preserve electronic evidence
- Stipulated agreements and preservation letters
- Preservation orders
- Litigation holds
- Technical issues concerning preservation
- Sanctions for spoliation
- The Coleman-Morgan Stanley saga
- Caution to practitioners : the moral of Morgan Stanley
- The new meaning of the rule 26(f) conference
- Public comments about early discussion of issues
- Suggestion of technical experts presence
- New rule 26(f) and note after public comment
- Changes made after publication and comment
- Advocates must explore the relevant information systems
- The wisdom of prompt action
- How to cure nervousness about preservation orders
|
- Practical obstacles to gathering systems information
- The possibility of proprietary IT architecture
- Beware, lack of information will foster motion practice
- The desirability of an early privilege waiver agreement
- What to ask for : the network architecture and the people running IT
- The IT people
- Network diagram
- Server/router list
- Workstation and laptop list
- ASPs
- Other relevant information to ask for
- Anticipating a not reasonably accessible response
- Why ask for network diagram, server list, workstation and laptop list, and ASPs?
- The difficulty of gathering evidence in a distributed system
- Issues regarding form of production
- Public commentary applauding discussion of form of production
- Negative comments about native format
- New rule 34(b) and advisory committee note
- The concept of direct access or entering a computer system
- Case study about form of production
- Native files and the existence of metadata
- The concept of differing views of file information
- Authenticity issues and the importance of metadata
- Considerations on choice of forms of production and processing native files to achieve different forms
- Collection and forensics
- The world of processing
- Choices about form of production
- Native file linking in electronic discovery databases
- Image linking in electronic discovery databases
- How to produce the information
- The thorny issue of accessibility
- Support for the two-tier system in commentary
- Opposition to the two-tier system in commentary
- New discovery rubric deemed unnecessary and redundant
- Objections to lack of particularity requirement
- Predictions of an explosion in motion practice
- General confusion about meaning of the term reasonably accessible
- Comments on the identification requirement
- Cost shifting and sharing
- Proposed rule 26(b)(2) after revisions
- The committee's revisions in light of the substantial public comment
- Balancing test for cost shifting for discovery of inaccessible information
- The notion of sampling to test the assertion of inaccessibility
- More detail and particularity on the identif
|
What is the Rotten Tomatoes Tomatometer?
The Tomatometer measures the percentage of Approved Tomatometer Critics who recommend a certain movie --
or the number of good reviews divided by the total number of reviews.
A good review is denoted by a
FRESH tomato.
A bad review is denoted by a ROTTEN tomato. 
In order for a movie to receive an overall rating of FRESH on Rotten Tomatoes, the reading on the Tomatometer for that movie must be at
least 60%. Otherwise, it is ROTTEN. The ratings and reviews are licensed by the Phoenix Public Library from Rotten Tomatoes. For more information,
please visit the Rotten Tomatoes website at www.rottentomatoes.com
Share this
Text this
View more information on the The discovery revolution : e-discovery amendments to the Federal rules of civil procedure
at Rotten Tomatoes.
