eDiscovery Update: Special Masters and eMediation

23 July 2010 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

Special Masters can help Judges and parties in eDiscovery disputes and also reduce the cost of litigation. Also managing eDiscovery can be improved by using eMediators who can help simply eDiscovery disputes and reduce motion practice. My recent article in the Texas Lawyer discusses some of the benefits of eMediation and Special Masters in eDiscovery. Over the past 20 years I have served as a Mediator and Special Master in computer technology and Internet lawsuits, and since there is electronic evidence in every case my experience is that Mediation conference and using Special Masters can make eDiscovery less expensive.

Court Ruled that Special Master in Anna Nicole Smith Abused Trial Court’s authority

A California defendant challenged Texas jurisdiction, but the Judge had not determined if the Court even had jurisdiction, as a result the trial court violated the Texas Special Master appointment Rules by authorizing the Special Master to get the defendant’s hard drive and conduct a a complete search. This was the second time that the same appellate court ruled that the trial court exceeded its authority to appoint a Special Master in this high profile case. There are always limits on the authority of what a Special Master can do in a case which should be spelled out in the Order Appointing the Special Master. Notwithstanding the outcome in this case surely we will see more cases with Special Masters since there is so much electronic evidence.
 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services