Mobile devices like cell phones and tablets are a potential treasure trove of evidence. But conducting data collection and digital forensics from these devices may prove challenging, and the two most popular platforms in the world, Apple and Android, offer divergent challenges.
The landscape of eDiscovery is evolving rapidly, driven by the proliferation of short message data. This type of data encompasses messaging platforms beyond traditional email, such as texts, Teams, Slack, and many others. As these forms of communication become increasingly dominant in both personal and professional contexts, they bring unique challenges and considerations for litigation and investigations.
Americans love social media - about 9% consider themselves to be an influencer! In January 2024, the Pew Research Center reported that 83% of American adults use YouTube, 68% use Facebook, and 47% use Instagram. Most users have accounts on multiple platforms and many actively create content.
That all adds up to a whole lot of potentially discoverable data.
More than 23 billion text messages were sent from cell phones daily in 2023. Consequently, the collection of messages will likely be a topic of conversation during a litigation or investigation. After balancing the issues of the case, the ability to obtain information from other sources, the potential relevance of cell phone data, and the time consuming and costly nature of cell phone collection, collection may be needed. Proper data collection and handling of messages is difficult, especially...
As a vendor that helps attorneys prepare for litigation during the eDiscovery phase, we've seen firsthand how the collection of short message data, such as text messages and social media, has become increasingly important. In fact, short message data is now one of the most common types of electronically stored information (ESI) collected in eDiscovery.
If you're looking for a quick way to become overwhelmed and discouraged, type "ediscovery" or "ediscovery resources" into Google.
Surveillance cameras are ubiquitous these days. Whether captured on doorbell cams, car dashboards, in parking garages, or in businesses, video surveillance footage is often requested and highly sought-after by litigants attempting to prove their cases in court. But what happens when the opposing party fails to provide this valuable ESI?
Remember your middle school teacher who would remove a grade letter for each day your paper was late? Maybe that teacher was inspired by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Energy Keepers, Inc v. Hyperblock LLC examines FRCP Rule 37(c)(1) and the timely disclosure of discovery under Rule 26.
You would think that by now employees know their cell phones are not, in fact, black boxes where anything goes and "privacy" reigns supreme. You would be wrong.
What happens when attorneys and their clients disregard both the spirit and letter of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure’s eDiscovery rules? As illustrated in the case below, very bad things.
Even federal judges have breaking points, and after more than 8 years, 400+ docket entries, and an almost incomprehensible number of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) blunders, defendants and their counsel unfortunately (but not surprisingly) found themselves on the exploding end of a 103-page,...