Certain decisions from the past year suggest that New York courts addressing requests to shift costs in connection with e-discovery are more inclined to exercise their discretion under Article 31 of the CPLR to limit the scope of the requested e-discovery than they are to shift the costs of such discovery to the requesting party.

Brian Bank published the article, “Cross-Border E-discovery in the Privacy Era,” in the Summer 2020 issue of USLAW Magazine.

Click here to read the article.

Update:

On April 8, 2020, Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence Marks issued Administrative Order AO/85/20 to promulgate the procedures and protocols in non-essential matters, which take effect on April 13, 2020. Although the order extends virtual operations to non-essential matters, no new non-essential matters may be filed until further notice. Nor may additional papers be filed

On Oct. 1, 2018, an amendment to the Rules of the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court took effect codifying the Commercial Division’s support of the use of technology assisted review (TAR) during discovery. Specifically, Commercial Division Rule 11-e(f) encourages parties to “use the most efficient means to review documents, including electronically stored information (ESI),

Brian Bank, Scott Green, and Catalina De La Hoz co-authored an article entitled, “Recent Developments in Employment Law and Litigation” for the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal.

Click here to read the article.

This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or downloaded

Brian L. Bank, Michael A. Sirignano, Priscilla D. Kam and Michelle A. Bholan co-authored the section Recent Developments in Business Litigation, which was published in the Winter 2017 issue of the American Bar Association’s Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal.

To read the article, Click Here.