Civil Litigation,
Law Practice
Apr. 7, 2012
eDiscovery: not so fast with the Da Silva Moore Lawyer Relief Act of 2012
Predictive coding will continue to be a hot topic, and litigants will use it to the extent that it makes fiscal sense.
A. Marco Turk
Emeritus Professor
CSU Dominguez Hills
Email: amarcoturk.commentary@gmail.com
A. Marco Turk is a contributing writer, professor emeritus and former director of the Negotiation, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding program at CSU Dominguez Hills, and currently adjunct professor of law, Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law.
No sooner than publication of my last column (March 16) regarding the Da Silva Moore case, and my conclusion that U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew Jay Peck's ruling regarding the advantages of predictive coding had established the "Lawyer Relief Act of 2012," word came that the federal district judge supervising that case, Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr., had granted plaintiffs' request for an opportunity to object to Peck's decision by March 19. This development is interesting in several...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In