Be the first to like this
The spotlight has turned to the issue of proportionality as it may be applied to the preservation of potentially relevant information. The postPension Committee world has moved beyond asking “if” litigants need to preserve information to a focus on “how.”
One need look no further than the testimony before the Dallas mini-conference in September and followed shortly thereafter by the debate stirred by the Pippins v. KPMG opinion.
Litigants are struggling to balance the increasing demands of preservation being driven by the exponential increase in electronically stored information (ESI) and the perceived rise in sanctions for spoliation. In order to control the increasing cost and “monumental inefficiency” that can result from traditional approaches to data preservation, the stakeholders in the U.S. legal system are searching for a solution founded on the principles of both reasonableness and proportionality as embodied in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The goal of this paper is to explore options for providing more objective “guideposts” for litigants facing the uncertainty of future discovery demands.