Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, a heavyweight in e-discovery circles, cautioned litigants in Victor Stanley Inc. v. Creative Pipe Inc., 250 F.R.D. 251 (2008), that a poorly conceived or cursory privilege review risks waiver when privileged documents are inadvertently produced.1
In Victor Stanley, the defendants conducted their privilege review using about 70 different keyword search terms. Defendants manually reviewed those documents returned in the keyword search. As to the remainder of the documents, however, defendants took no steps to assess whether the searches had captured all privileged documents. The result was that defendants inadvertently produced 165 privileged electronic documents.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
