Resource Center

» Download the 2010 Delegate Information Package

» Download the Solution Provider Brochure

Articles

• How the BP Oil Spill Could Lead to an e-Discovery Disaster

  BP will focus on data preservation, collection, and backup tape remediation in preparation for litigation arising from the recent spill in the Gulf. Courtesy of Legal IT Professionals

• State E-Discovery Rulemaking after the 2006 Federal Amendments: An Update
• Investigations and Prosecutions Involving Electronically Stored Information

Podcasts

• Proven Strategies to Increase Value & Reduce Costs Early in the Litigation Cycle

David Cowen, Partner & Co-Chair of E-Discovery Analytics and Technology and Bree Kelly, Esq, of K&L Gates discuss cost reduction, improving management, best practices and pitfalls to avoid in the context of EDRM strategy.

• The Tie in Between Information Governance and Litigation Preparedness with Craig Carpenter of Recommind

Craig Carpenter, Vice President and General Counsel at Recommind, discusses the impact of effective litigation preparedness planning on case life cycle, how to prepare for initial approach to IT vendor selection, and managing conflicts between legal, IT, and regulation compliance.

E-Discovery Information Project:

Gucci v Curveal

In a recent review, Chris Dale, of the E-Discovery Information Project, responds to the Gucci v Curveal ruling where he discusses the implications on records disclosure from an international perspective. Click here to view the entire post

About the Case:

Two recent rulings have ordered disclosure of foreign documents regardless whether or not such disclosure will violate a country’s criminal law and “blocking” statutes.

The ruling came down from US District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of NY, compelling a Malaysian Bank, United Overseas Bank’s New York Agency (UOB), to produce financial records for the defendant’s overseas bank account. On the grounds that UOB was not a party to the lawsuit and such disclosure violates Malaysian banking laws, UOB objected to the subpoena. Despite substantial evidence provided by UOB the court decided that disclosure was justified and gave UOB two weeks to produce the records.

In reaching this conclusion, the district court reviewed the US Supreme court decision in Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the S. Dist. Of Iowa, 482 U.S. 522 (1987) and decided not to defer to Malaysian court based on two factors. First, the court found it significant that UOB had submitted no authority establishing the likelihood that it would actually be prosecuted and punished for violation of the Malaysian statute if it disclosed the information in question pursuant to a US court order. Second, the court emphasized the fact that the Malaysian government itself had not voiced any objections to disclosure in this case