In the months leading up to their enactment, the Dec. 1, 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generated a substantial amount of commentary, analysis, and—in some cases—concern from practicing litigators. The two most significant changes—the reformulation of Rule 26(b)(1)’s definition of discoverable material, and Rule 37(e)’s new framework for sanctioning the spoliation of electronically stored information (ESI)—both seemingly had the potential to impact the discovery process significantly. Thus far, the impact has been a mixed bag.
As this article details, the change to Rule 26(b)(1) appears to have done little but provide another tool for courts to limit patently overbroad discovery requests. On the other hand, the amended spoliation standard has, at least for some courts, truly set the ESI sanctions bar higher, and for other courts, forced a heavier reliance on inherent judicial authority to justify the imposition of sanctions.
Amended Rule 26(b)(1)
This content has been archived.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]
