Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Electronic Data, Electronic Searching, Inadvertent Production Of Privileged Data: A Perfect Storm, Donald Wochna
Electronic Data, Electronic Searching, Inadvertent Production Of Privileged Data: A Perfect Storm, Donald Wochna
Akron Law Review
This article suggests that the practical impact of treating electronic searching as an expert function is to permit attorneys to focus and strategize on the process of electronic searching rather than on the completeness of document production. In effect, electronic searching permits attorneys to quit focusing on finding documents and begin focusing on identifying electronic sources of information on which reside relevant documents that can be extracted by means of electronic searching protocols.
Viewing Privilege Through A Prism: Attorney-Client Privilege In Light Of Bulk Data Collection, Paul H. Beach
Viewing Privilege Through A Prism: Attorney-Client Privilege In Light Of Bulk Data Collection, Paul H. Beach
Notre Dame Law Review
This Note will argue that the attorney-client privilege is justified not only by the popular instrumentalist rationales, but also by noninstrumentalist thinking. It will further argue that Federal Rule of Evidence 502 gives federal courts the tools to protect the attorney-client privilege in light of bulk data collection. Even where courts do not find that traditional modes of communication constitute reasonable steps to protect a confidential communication, general considerations of fairness—as noted in Rule 502’s committee notes—should encourage courts to uphold attorney-client privilege in future situations of bulk data collection disclosures. Part I will discuss the establishment, development, and operations …
The Universal Remedy For Attorney Abandonment: Why Holland V. Florida And Maples V. Thomas Give All Courts The Power To Vacate Civil Judgments Against Abandoned Clients By Way Of Rule 60(B)(6), Stephen White
Pepperdine Law Review
This Article argues that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) is the only remedy that courts can always rely on to enforce this power. The universal availability of this statutory rule, which states that courts can vacate judgments against parties “for any . . . reason that justifies relief,” ensures that courts can safeguard clients from the conduct of attorneys who have abandoned them. Part II of this Comment provides an overview of the distinct models the Supreme Court has utilized to evaluate attorney misconduct and the circumstances that bind clients to that misconduct. Part II also describes in detail …