The InformationWeek -- Blogs
Welcome Guest. | Log In| Register | Membership Benefits

Information Management Blog

Topics:   Compliance : Information Management

  • Email this page E-mail this page
  • Print this page Print this page
  • Bookmark and Share
  • icon

Changes Ahead For E-Discovery Rules?


Posted by Andrew Conry-Murray, Dec 9, 2008 09:47 AM

As IT and corporate counsel struggle with the financial, technical, and legal burdens of e-discovery, efforts are under way to lighten those burdens by modifying federal rules. But others say changes aren't necessary.


A task force from the American College of Trial Lawyers and the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System aims to propose major amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).

Two years ago this December, FRCP rules were amended to clarify the role that electronically stored information (ESI) plays in civil litigation. But those changes dramatically increased the cost of litigation.

How expensive? While costs vary by case, Verizon developed an internal benchmark and found it cost the company $5,000 to $7,000 per gigabyte to process and produce ESI. Given that corporate litigation routinely results in hundreds of gigabytes of data, e-discovery alone can cost millions of dollars. IDC predicts the e-discovery industry will generate revenue of $21.8 billion by 2011, up from $9.7 billion in 2006.

"A system where costs are so prohibitive that only a small fraction of society can afford to litigate is not the system we are intended to have," says Justice Rebecca Love Kourlis, executive director of the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System. Kourlis is a former state Supreme Court Justice of Colorado.

The problem is vast stores of information have been opened to scrutiny without accounting for several critical factors. Those factors include lax or nonexistent information management practices within many enterprises, poor understanding by counsel and the judiciary of the technological challenges of making information accessible, and a lack of guidelines for what constitutes a reasonable discovery effort proportionate to the case at hand.

Kourlis says the task force created by the American College of Trial Lawyers and the institute is deliberating a set of proposed principles that would essentially rethink the notion of discovery.

She says the underlying assumption today is that everything is discoverable. But when you're dealing with ESI, says Kourlis, "it's like counting to infinity."

"We are working on ways to contain discovery in a way that produces the primary relevant documents but is also cost-effective and doesn't spin out of control."

That's good news for beleaguered IT executives and internal counsel as they grapple with the current e-discovery rules. But enterprises shouldn't expect the cavalry to ride over the hill any time soon. Kourlis says she'd like to see pilot projects at the state level in the next 12 to 18 months. However, changes to the federal rules, if they happen, could easily be six to eight years away.

Others in the legal profession argue that changes to FRCP aren't required. "The rules provide the teeth necessary to limit discovery and to limit costs to reasonable levels," says Thomas Smith, a partner at K&L Gates and a founding member of the firm's E-Discovery Analysis and Technology group. "My question is, will courts enforce those rules?"

"I'm not blaming the judges," says Smith. "They can't be expected to pore through the nuances of e-discovery rules and understand the nooks and crannies of a party's information systems. Counsel has to understand all that, and be ready to clearly articulate its position to the court."

Whether the rules change or not, e-discovery compels IT executives to take information management seriously, and that's a good thing. Aligning the organization's information management practices to make discovery as efficient and defensible as possible can pay dividends in other areas as well, including making e-mail systems more efficient, reducing storage costs, and better organizing information so that employees can quickly find what they need to be more productive.

« Outsourcing Foes 'Less Than Thrilled' With Obama | Main | LG Says It Has The World's First LTE Chip For Phones »



Sign Up Now
For InformationWeek News Alerts




This is a public forum. United Business Media and its affiliates are not responsible for and do not control what is posted herein. United Business Media makes no warranties or guarantees concerning any advice dispensed by its staff members or readers.

Community standards in this comment area do not permit hate language, excessive profanity, or other patently offensive language. Please be aware that all information posted to this comment area becomes the property of United Business Media LLC and may be edited and republished in print or electronic format as outlined in United Business Media's Terms of Service.

Important Note: This comment area is NOT intended for commercial messages or solicitations of business.




 
 

  1. Massive Parallelism Has a Name ... Extreme Scale Computing
  2. Intel Turbo Boost Technology Monitor: A Windows Gadget to Understand Dynamic Frequencies
  3. Two-Stage Input Parallel Pipeline: Part 2


Join The InformationWeek Group On LinkedIn


  1. Google's Universal Translator
  2. Google Reduces Nexus One ETF, But Not Enough
  3. Google's Buzz Skips webOS?


  1. Microsoft Fixes 26 Vulnerabilities In Windows, Office
  2. Intel Ships Itanium Server Processor
  3. Commerce Department Proposes One-Stop Climate Service
  4. Microsoft Denies Windows 7 Battery Bug
  5. Google Buzz Challenges Facebook, Twitter
  6. Android, iPhone Gain In Smartphone Market

 

  Ars Technica
Boing Boing
Channel 9 Forums
CRN Blogs
Dr.Dobb's Portal: Blogs
Engadget
Gizmodo
GrokLaw
  Lifehacker
Schneier on Security
Slashdot
TechCrunch
Techdirt
Techmeme
Valleywag

  DECEMBER 2008
NOVEMBER 2008
OCTOBER 2008
SEPTEMBER 2008
AUGUST 2008
JULY 2008
JUNE 2008
MAY 2008
  APRIL 2008
MARCH 2008
FEBRUARY 2008
JANUARY 2008
DECEMBER 2007
NOVEMBER 2007
OCTOBER 2007
SEPTEMBER 2007