Disqus - Latest Comments for taylormade

Re: Court Rules Defendant’s Production Need Not Be Lost in Translation: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Mon, 27 Jan 2020 10:24:22 -0000

Plaintiff apparently did not submit a request for all documents to be presented in English in their "meet and confer", so that argument would be moot. And one would be cautioned that an affirmative ruling on plaintiff's request could reverberate in all directions: Would all documents in any production have to be submitted in the language used by all plaintiffs? For instance, would a defendant in France responding to globally-based clients in say, US/Korea/Russia, be held responsible in providing translated documents in each of the plaintiff's respective "native" language? Hopefully not.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Despite Email from Defendants Instructing to Destroy Evidence, Court Declines Sanctions: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Thu, 05 Dec 2019 10:52:49 -0000

From the information provided, it is somewhat difficult to ascertain the value of the deleted information, its relative importance to the matter at hand, and whether, as Mr. Craig Ball amply states, the information was available from other sources or was totally deprived from Relators' review. But the actions taken by the defense, from irresponsibly late issuance of legal holds to direct instructions to delete potentially relevant information, seem to step over a fairly bright line of unacceptable actions. Rule 37(e) now seems to make it very difficult to prevent respondents from such actions, or to even give pause for those contemplating breaking such rules in the future.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Court Agrees that Emails Including Counsel Aren’t Privileged Because They Don’t Offer Legal Advice: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Mon, 11 Nov 2019 09:39:16 -0000

This ruling seems to validate the premise that the content of the message (email; text; etc.) and its relationship to surrounding communications drive the decision regarding privilege, rather than the title of the correspondent(s) involved in the communications. I wonder if the court's decision would change if any of the email senders might have directly asked of the GC, "What is your opinion?" - would that question and response trigger legal opinion? Probably would depend on the target of the question, as in "opinion of what", and the nature of the GC's response. Again, content.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Forget CCPA. COPPA Just Cost YouTube and Google $170 Million: Cybersecurity Trends

taylormade — Mon, 09 Sep 2019 08:01:02 -0000

The fines, while not as serious as they would be under GDPR regulations, may be a welcome step in the right direction to correct these violations, but what about the data that was collected. I have yet to see any settlement that says the wrongdoers will delete the data that is the basis of the offense and provide validation that they have done so. So what good is a fine, if the damage is not corrected? Google, Facebook, YouTube and all other social media monoliths will shrug off the fines until they become large enough to actually infringe on profits, and will continue to abuse children through collection, sale and monetizing/profiteering from their personal information and privacy.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Chain, Chain, Chain – Chain of Custody: eDiscovery Throwback Thursdays

taylormade — Thu, 11 Jul 2019 10:58:23 -0000

Good points on tracking. I've used similar fields (or metadata) for chain of custody. From my experiences "inside" the corporate wall, I tracked document movement from data owners to the data collectors, to 3rd party vendors and/or law firms, and back if documents were returned in any manner. And also concluded the chain of custody log with notation if documents were copies and destroyed by the holding party (vendor or law firm) at conclusion of the matter. Always felt a "closed loop" of chain of custody was important.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery LLC

Re: Will CCPA Be a “Dumpster Fire” for Those Trying to Comply? Here are 10 Reasons it Might Be: Data Privacy Trends

taylormade — Mon, 08 Jul 2019 13:44:55 -0000

Very good article, at least certain to be a bit inflammatory with some predictable pushback that it is very speculative. Certainly there is room for refinement, even with years of preparation the GDPR needed to "work itself into the saddle" (from my previous life!). Whether the California policy will prove to be a foundation for other states to follow, or for that thus-far fantasy of a federal privacy policy is still to be seen.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery LLC

Re: Answers to Your Frequently Asked CCPA Questions: Data Privacy Best Practices

taylormade — Thu, 04 Apr 2019 08:31:51 -0000

The potential conflict and confusion arising from multiple state privacy policies with differing rules is one headache facing nationally-based companies. Adding a federal privacy policy elevates the issue to a new level - which would be the authoritative rule, one of the state policies or the federal policy? I will discuss this in an upcoming presentation I am preparing...the best analogy of current policy dispute that comes to my mind is the marijuana fiasco, with people arrested in one state because they are in possession of the drug which is legal in their state of residence. But privacy rule conflicts will not be so clear-cut. Even without a federal policy thrown into the mix, multi-state companies have a huge challenge facing them.

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery LLC

Re: Emoji Are Showing Up in Court Cases More and More: eDiscovery Trends

taylormade — Wed, 20 Feb 2019 11:22:47 -0000

Just a thought...perhaps emoji in at least some instances might be the visual form of voice inflection. As a very basic example, using the "surprise" or "shocked" emoji - the startled face with hands on each side of the face - certainly seems to change how a person "hears" the sentence before that emoji. Perhaps in a courtroom setting, the "angry emoji" could become very important, possibly denoting a threat within the preceding sentence. All this is conjecture, of course...unless the judge decides it isn't. <surprise shock="" emoji="" here="">

Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Court Sides with Defendants in Subpoena of Police Department Records of Unsolved Murder: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Thu, 03 Jan 2019 07:55:54 -0000

This ruling certainly seems to fall within the FRCP Rule 34(b)(2), requiring respondents to present clear and specific reasons for not responding (or objecting to) to a discovery request. Although Defendant here did not rely on impermissible 'boiler plate' response, they did not clarify their objection in a manner tailored to address the specific request. I would agree with Court's ruling.

Aaron Taylor, GreenLight Discovery LLC

Re: Will Lawyers Ever Embrace Technology?: eDiscovery Best Practices, Part Three

taylormade — Tue, 20 Nov 2018 09:09:15 -0000

Tom: Excellent points, very concise way of pointing out that basics are basics...necessary in all disciplines, as those disciplines become more sophisticated.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery LLC

Re: Could We Be Close to a Second State to Approve a Technology CLE Requirement?: eDiscovery Trends

taylormade — Mon, 14 May 2018 10:08:25 -0000

Doug:
Adding any amount of required tech training seems a good step forward, and leads to the obvious question: Given the greatly increased intrusion and importance of technology in all phases of eDiscovery, is one hour out of twelve enough time? Certainly, there are many areas of law that attorneys must remain competent and current about; I think it would be interesting to see a breakdown by percentage of recommended categories for continued CLE training. This might give governing bodies a better idea of where their state governing requirements stand in relation to recommended training standards. In any case, it's great to see eDiscovery tech training gain in importance.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Law Enforcement Has Found a New Way to Put a Finger on iPhone Evidence: eDiscovery Trends

taylormade — Thu, 05 Apr 2018 10:36:14 -0000

My layperson's perspective is that warrant requirement is justified. LE in particular, with strong possibility of government intrusion as well, seems determined to follow a flawed premise - that information on a private cellphone is somehow different from information possessed by an individual in other formats. Basically, information that I "own" or possess in my home such as files in a cabinet, letters on my desk, photos in albums...just the usual stuff we have always had, that are definitely considered private, are all off-limits to anyone's prying eyes if I drop dead. But LE seems to have this baseless belief that my cellphone is somehow different, that they can just pry it open whenever/however they wish if I'm not there to protest. This is absolutely a breach of privacy, and simply put seems to being hyped or "normalized" so that we don't even question the abuse.
I definitely fall on the side of needing to increase our efforts to preserve and protect privacy - in the commercial arena, in law enforcement and other legal actions, and in corporate protection of employee privacy. The heavy hand of dilution of our privacy is incremental; I interpret this action as just another step in loss of privacy rights.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Pizza Hut Pie Tops – The Internet of Things Keeps Getting Stranger: eDiscovery Trends

taylormade — Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:30:29 -0000

Excellent article and a continuing eye-opener on the incredibly fast-moving targets in eDiscovery. The great observations made in your article point to the need for having an eDiscovery Administrator who is not pigeonholed by having only one skill, that of just managing legal holds and discovery processes. The Administrator, whether an in-house hire or a primary consultant, must be highly knowledgeable in Records Management and Information Governance, at least conversant if not skilled in privacy matters, and absolutely skilled in inter-acting with IT...not required to be a true "techie", but able to communicate well with IT people.
The IoT world probably expanded more just in the time I took to write this...perhaps a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much. Thanks again for an informative article.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: ALSP – Not Just Your Daddy’s LPO, Part Two: eDiscovery Trends

taylormade — Mon, 12 Mar 2018 08:11:16 -0000

As this article points out, there can be other meanings to the acronym, ALSP; Mr. O'Connor seems to be referring to the fairly common title, "Alternative Legal Service Providers", which is an umbrella term for the various choices in services offered by paralegals, small-firm practitioners, basically any niche companies for such tasks as document review, litigation support, contract management, discovery and so forth. However, there are many other titles outside of the legal discipline that use this acronym as well, perhaps most prevalent being American Life Science Pharmaceuticals, among other medical-related organizations. So one should recognize which industry is being referred to, being careful to acknowledge such in writing or discussing ALSP.
This is a very good article, as usual from this author - thank you, Mr. O'Connor
Aaron Taylor
Greenlight Discovery, LLC

Re: Bannon: 'Special place in hell for Republicans' who don't support Trump, Moore

taylormade — Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:52:29 -0000

“special place in hell for people who pray on children”...who, pray tell, writes this crap? I pray you have someone old enough and intelligent enough to know the difference between "pray" and "prey"; but then, it appears not. What an unintelligent country this has become.

Re: Dispute Over Scope of Preservation Obligation Leads to Partial Sanctions For Now: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Thu, 07 Dec 2017 09:12:16 -0000

To my non-lawyer mind, it seems that the court opened exactly that door that would allow jury to at least consider that spoliation by one of the parties may have been an indication of potential harm to that party had the information been preserved. By not giving specific instructions, the court seemed to limit the weight or impact of that consideration, but still allowed plaintiff to "plant the seed" of inference. Obviously, this is an instructive tale for parties to ensure they understand and adhere to the entire scope of discovery and the language of preservation letters/legal holds, possibly to err on the side of caution and preserve more information rather than less.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Does this Ring a Bell? Court Orders Plaintiff’s Quick Peek Over Defendant’s Objections: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:28:33 -0000

Ha! Might I just say, that should suffice. ;-)

Re: Does this Ring a Bell? Court Orders Plaintiff’s Quick Peek Over Defendant’s Objections: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Mon, 13 Nov 2017 08:33:51 -0000

Doug, Thanks for a very concise interpretation of this case; I had read about it before, but without this clarity. And have to admit I'd like to see some outside judicial thought on this, since a court's decision to deviate somewhat from Sedona recommendations does cause eyebrows to raise. It's easy to see the court's position on the aggravation of "piecemeal" production, and should be a simple learning point for those in charge of production. On the other hand, one wonders if the requestor might have been a bit ambiguous in drafting requests, or had "jabbed the sleeping dog" too many times with irritating modifications to requests. There can be nuances of the matter going on in real time that are hard to judge after the fact.

Re: Court Chastises Parties for Turning Case into a “Discovery Slugfest”: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Sun, 12 Nov 2017 11:42:30 -0000

Larry: Yes, if I recall correctly, weren't the FRCP updates supposed to link cooperation and proportionality with results similar to those which this court is reaching for? But, as is still being demonstrated, what counsels should do, and what they actually do, can be at odds with "the games people play".

Re: Addressing the Inconsistent Email Address: eDiscovery Best Practices

taylormade — Sun, 12 Nov 2017 11:31:06 -0000

Curiosity is killing the cat here: Do you know the reason for the insertion of the “FYDIBOHF23SPDLT” you mention in your Fun Fact?

Re: Why Every Photographer Needs a 70-200mm Lens

taylormade — Thu, 09 Nov 2017 08:33:19 -0000

Any reason not to just go with the Nikon 70-300 lens and not have to mess with a teleconverter? I've enjoyed mine a lot.

Re: Adverbs on Trial: Innocent on Two Counts, but Guilty on Three More

taylormade — Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:13:56 -0000

That makes sense...thanks!

Re: Adverbs on Trial: Innocent on Two Counts, but Guilty on Three More

taylormade — Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:03:41 -0000

I firstly tended to treat this article somewhat lightly, thinking that it would treat the topic too superficially. But I surged forward bravely and found it highly informative, and totally recommend it, as the timely suggestions will stay with me always.
Now, all fun aside, is an emoji considered an adverb, such as a "smiley" showing that someone is "happily" supporting something?
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery, LLC

Re: Defendant Not Sanctioned Despite Use of Evidence Wiping Software: eDiscovery Case Week

taylormade — Tue, 25 Jul 2017 11:01:35 -0000

I believe the rationale from the court for the decision needs to be emphasized - this decision is not supporting the use of "wiping software" or condoning the acts of the defendant. Rather, plaintiff simply did not perform up to task on showing that there was sufficient evidence to believe defendant in fact transferred data from her company's servers to her personal computer. The updated FRCP place a higher burden on plaintiff in that regard, and the court seems to be justified in the decision.
Aaron Taylor
Greenlight Discovery LLC

Re: Court Rules Decisively in Battle Between eDiscovery Providers Over Hired Sales Agents: eDiscovery Case Law

taylormade — Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:04:37 -0000

Great coverage and explanation of this topic, Doug...thanks.
Aaron Taylor
GreenLight Discovery LLC