New questions constantly arise about how to effectively and fairly handle the potentially overwhelming demands and costs of e-discovery in litigation. This program will provide an overview of the development of e-discovery law and a look to where that law is heading. An outstanding faculty of experienced lawyers, judges, and e-discovery professionals will provide an inside look at the current state of e-discovery, give tips for avoiding pitfalls litigants have encountered in the years since the passage of the federal rules, and discuss important ethical issues in light of recent court decisions imposing discovery sanctions and outlining the duties of outside and in-house counsel.
This seminar is designed to provide counsel with the understanding necessary to advise clients on state, federal and international e-discovery strategic and technology issues. You will take away practical strategies you can use when you are called upon to provide guidance on e-retention policies or e-discovery.
Lecture Topics [Total time 06:05:07]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
- Introduction* [00:14:13]
Gary A. Adler
- View from the Bench: Status of E-discovery Law [00:59:34]
Hon. Andrew J. Peck, Hon. David J. Waxse
- Litigation Begins: Early Case Assesment and the Rule 26(f) Conference [00:56:02]
Stanley M. Gibson, Paul R. Gupta, David S. Cannon, Hon. David J. Waxse
- Litigation Continues: Nuts and Bolts of Preservation and Document Review [01:01:01]
Jeffrey J. Fowler, Ashish S. Prasad, Peggy A. Stulberg
- Annual Update of In-house Counsel's Guide to E-Discovery: Everything You Need to Know [01:04:59]
Steven C. Bennett, John J. Rosenthal
- Ethics in E-Discovery [00:51:46]
David J. Lender
- Hot Topics in E-Discovery: Defensibility in E-Discovery [00:57:32]
Thomas Y. Allman, Maura R. Grossman, Anne S. Jordan
The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:
- Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe et al. [11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) February 24, 2012]
Hon. Andrew J. Peck
- Search, Forward Will Manual Document Review and Keyword Searches Be Replaced by Computer-Assisted Coding?
Hon. Andrew J. Peck
- The Courts' Intervene with Model Rules to Curb the Costs of E-Discovery: Will it Work and Should Litigants Use these Model Rules in the Rule 26(f) Conference?
Stanley M. Gibson
- An E-Discovery Model Order
Stanley M. Gibson
- Early Case Assessment and the Rule 26(f) Conference
Paul R. Gupta
- Early Case Assessment and the Rule 26(f) Conference
Brian C. Rocca
- Collect to Protect: Processes and Technologies for Electronic Data Collection
Ashish S. Prasad
- Are E-Discovery Costs Recoverable by a Prevailing Party?
Steven C. Bennett
- Managing E-Discovery Costs: Mission Possible
Steven C. Bennett
- Chapter 13: Ethics and Electronic Discovery
David J. Lender
- Preservation, Search Technology & Rulemaking
Thomas Y. Allman, Maura R. Grossman
Presentation Material
- Introduction
Gary A. Adler
- Introduction - Audience Response Questions
- Litigation Begins: Early Case Assesment and the Rule 26(f) Conference
- Litigation Continues: Nuts and Bolts of Preservation and Document Review
Jeffrey J. Fowler, Ashish S. Prasad, Peggy A. Stulberg
- Annual Update of In-house Counsel's Guide to E-Discovery: Everything You Need to Know
Steven C. Bennett, John J. Rosenthal
- Ethics in E-Discovery
David J. Lender
PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments. Please check the CLE Calculator above for CLE information specific to your state.
On-Demand Web Programs and Segments are approved in:
Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6, North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.
Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.
Minnesota approves live webcasts ONLY
Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.
*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.
1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.
2Iowa: The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
3Missouri: On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year. Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements. Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.
4New Hamphsire: The approval is for three years from recorded date.
5New Mexico: On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year.
6New York: Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats.
7North Carolina: A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs.
8Ohio: To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us. Online programs are considered self-study. Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period. The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.
9Oklahoma: Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.
10Pennsylvania: PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
11Rhode Island: Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit. On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.
12Tennessee: The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.
13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.
14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed. The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit. There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.
Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.
If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.
Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.