TOPIC- Prepare an abstract of a case or article dealing with e-Discovery.
There are required elements that must be included with the abstract .Please play close attention to these instructions and guidelines.
The abstract is a summary of the author’s article in the words of the student.Abstracts submitted containing the original article’s text in full or part will be discounted from the total required submissions for the semester.
Cases or articles may be chosen from technical journals or websites, legal journals or websites or general news or information sites. These cases must cover civil litigation not criminal.
If you chose an article that does not directly involve a specific case or that involves several cases, you must be creative in completing the information for each required heading.It is not acceptable to simply say NA or to skip a heading because the article you choose does not have information about that topic. In addition, you may have to complete additional research on the case or article in able to fully complete the abstract.
Remember to focus on civil litigation. Another place to start your search is by entering the topic plus “case” into your search engine and review the results for potential cases.
Timely legal developments are obviously preferred; reporting on a case that has subsequently been overturned or a law that has been amended or repealed does little to keep you informed about current issues. Cases should be from 2007 forward.If the article you chose is a composite of several cases, you should pick only one case and delve into the appropriate aspects of that case.In addition, you should search the case using your search engine to assure you are aware of any updated information.
CAUTION: YOU MUST USE THE TEMPLATE HEADINGS FOR EACH OF YOUR ABSTRACTS.IF THE TEMPLATE IS NOT FOLLOWED, YOU WILL RECEIVE AT LEAST ONE GRADE LOWER FOR THE SUBMISSION.
YOU MUST USE ONLY CIVIL CASES FOR YOUR ABSTRACTS.
Each abstract must contain the following headings:
- Article title
- Publication date
- URL (Do not include the original article.If I have questions, I can use the URL to find the original article).
- Facts of the dispute
- Plaintiff’s claim
- Defendant’s claim
- Applicable law (i.e. statute, regulation, treaty)
- Issue of law
- Remedy Sought
- Holding (may state n/a, if an adjudicatory body has not rendered a decision)
- e-Discovery process used
- Impact on e-discovery precedents, case law, and the case(s) at issue
You must include your evaluation of the possible impact on the e-evidence or e-discovery process on the particular legal issues in the article under the appropriate headings.This is where you apply your knowledge and skills as business professional. If none of these elements apply, then it is incumbent on you to be creative and do analysis on what you case covers.No analysis will equal a lower grade and possibly a “F” for your abstract.
Your abstract should reflect a summary in your own words of the material in the article you are discussing.If I have to use the URL to read the article to understand your abstract, your grade will automatically be lowered one grade.It is your job to write in a clear, convincing manner and convey the essence of the case or article.
Due to the system that the emails were stored on, ADT sought to avoid their obligation to produce the archived emails.According to ADT’s Manager of Information Technology, John Mitchell, restoring the emails could take four years at an initial cost of $88,000.00 and six months later Mitchell amended the cost to ten times that amount.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(B):A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost.
Issues of Law:
ADT must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of the burden and cost it would require to retrieve the documents from its Plasmon System.Starbucks conducted their own research with vendors that estimated the total cost of retrieval, much lower than the cost that ADT estimated and the Court determined that ADT had other options to retrieve the digital evidence in a more timely and costly manner.Did ADT prove that the discovery sought by Starbucks is not reasonably accessible?
With its motion to compel, Starbucks is awarded costs and fees.
In Starbucks Corporation v. ADT Security Services, Inc., No. 08-cv-900-JCC, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, (D. Wash. Apr. 30, 2009) Starbuck’s motion to compel was granted.
The court relied on AAB Joint Venture v. U.S., 75 Fed. CI. 432, 2007, where the court noted the defendant cannot be relieved of duties to produce documents just because the defendant has chosen a means to preserve the evidence on a system that allows expensive means of retrieval.
Impact on E-Discovery:
This ruling stressed that good cause would require production even if the information were deemed not reasonably accessible.Further research determined that the emails that Starbucks were seeking were important in determining what witnesses knew about the ADT install contract requirements for Starbucks nationwide.The court ruled that without ADT’s ESI, Starbucks would not be allowed to discover what the witnesses knew and have the evidence to challenge the testimony of the five individuals.Finally, the court scheduled subsequent discovery conferences and determined that ADT could produce email “stubs” that contained relevant data that included “To”, “From”, “Subject Matter” data and approximately 80 characters of email that Starbucks could use to filter through the information and determine what may be important.It was also determined that more than half of the Plasmon-format disks were actually utilized on Universal Data Format (UDF) that would allow a less burdensome retrieval process.
Impact on e-discovery precedents, case law, and the case(s) at issue:
Companies need to look at alternative ways to meet a discovery request and certainly not over-estimate costs if other avenues are available to comply with the discovery request.