Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Preparing For Your Rule 26(F) Conference When Esi Is Involved - And Isn't Esi Always Involved?, Amii N. Castle Jan 2015

Preparing For Your Rule 26(F) Conference When Esi Is Involved - And Isn't Esi Always Involved?, Amii N. Castle

Amii n Castle

In most civil cases filed today, discovery is likely to include electronically stored information (“ESI”). This article details the steps counsel must take when a lawsuit filed, and the article gives particularized instruction on ESI at each juncture. The article discusses the following steps: At Step One, the judge issues an initial scheduling order, which puts into motion several deadlines: the Rule 26(f) conference, the date to submit the parties’ planning report, and the Rule 16 Conference. Step Two directs attorneys to talk to their own clients about ESI that is relevant to the case. Questions are suggested, such as: …


Business Entities - Basic Legal Issues, Curtis E.A. Karnow Dec 2014

Business Entities - Basic Legal Issues, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Brief introduction to certain business litigation issues including vicarious liability, sealing records, representation by counsel, qualification of domestic corporations; depositions of persons most knowledgeable, and conflicts of laws.


New Opportunities For Obtaining And Using Litigation Reserves And Disclosures, Matthew J. Barrett Oct 2013

New Opportunities For Obtaining And Using Litigation Reserves And Disclosures, Matthew J. Barrett

Matthew J. Barrett

Following the publication of Opportunities for Obtaining and Using Litigation Reserves and Disclosures, which highlighted the helpful information about litigation reserves that a litigator can often detect or discover from an opponent's financial statements, accounting books and records, tax returns, public filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), and auditor, two important regulatory developments occurred in early 2003 that create additional opportunities to obtain information about an opponent's assessments of (i) expected liability in the underlying case or (ii) obligations or settlements in similar cases. First, pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the SEC issued final regulations …


Opportunities For Obtaining And Using Litigation Reserves And Disclosures, Matthew J. Barrett Oct 2013

Opportunities For Obtaining And Using Litigation Reserves And Disclosures, Matthew J. Barrett

Matthew J. Barrett

In late 1975, the accounting and legal professions reached an accord that led to three new professional standards: (1) a new financial accounting rule for contingencies, (2) an auditing standard addressing the requirement that an auditor obtain evidence about an audit client's contingent liabilities to determine whether the client has properly treated those items in its financial statements, and (3) the American Bar Association's Statement of Policy Regarding Lawyers' Responses to Auditors' Requests for Information under that auditing standard. The Commentary that accompanied the Statement of Policy explicitly stated that the organized bar's expectation that communications between lawyers and auditors …


Sealing Records, Curtis E.A. Karnow Oct 2013

Sealing Records, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Practical tips on sealing records in California state courts


E-Discovery Issues, Curtis E.A. Karnow Jan 2013

E-Discovery Issues, Curtis E.A. Karnow

Curtis E.A. Karnow

Bullet point outline of e-discovery issues


Back To The Future: Discovery Cost Allocation And Modern Procedural Theory, Martin H. Redish, Colleen Mcnamara Jan 2010

Back To The Future: Discovery Cost Allocation And Modern Procedural Theory, Martin H. Redish, Colleen Mcnamara

Martin H Redish

It has long been established that as a general rule, discovery costs are to remain with the party from whom discovery has been sought. While courts have authority to "shift" costs in an individual instance, the presumption against such an alteration in traditional practice is quite strong. Yet at no point did the drafters of the original Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ever make an explicit decision to allocate discovery costs in this manner. Nor, apparently, did they (or anyone since) ever explain why such an allocation choice is to be made in the first place. As a result, our …