Additional Materials

Forms

• Chain of custody form, provided by Digital Mandate
• Data harvesting/collection questionnaire, provided by Digital Mandate
• Database collection form, provided by Baker Robbins and Company
• Initial document collection form, provided by Baker Botts
• Sample questionnaire for IT staff provided by Baker Robbins & Co.

Articles

• Baker Robbins & Company, E-Discovery 101: Electronic Discovery Overview (July 18, 2005), http://edrm.nethttp://www.edrm.net/wiki/images/5/5e/E-Discovery101.pdf
• Charles Keller and Kenneth Shear, SPI Litigation Direct LLC, Interviewing Business and IT Clients for Electronic Discovery (2005), http://edrm.nethttp://www.edrm.net/wiki/images/e/e5/Interviewing_Business_and_IT_Clients_for_Electronic_Discovery.pdf
• Lisa M. Arent, Robert D. Brownstone and William A. Fenwick, EDiscovery: Preserving, Requesting & Producing Electronic Information, 19 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech L.J. 131, 133-143 (2002) (co-author), as updated December, 2003, http://www.fenwick.com/docstore/publications/litigation/ediscovery.pdf

Decisions

• Arista Records v. Sakfield Holding Company, 314 F.Supp. 2d 27, 34 (D.D.C. 2004), http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/page=10
• Broccoli v. Echostar Communications, 229 F.R.D. 506 (D.Md. 2005), http://el.shb.com/nl_images/edisc/nov05/broccoli%20v.%20echostar.op.080405.pdf
• Coleman (Parent) Holdings v. Morgan Stanley, 2005 WL 679071 (Fla. 15th Cir. Mar. 1, 2005), http://commonscold.typepad.com/commonscold/files/adverse_inference.PDF
• U.S. v. Andersen, 544 U.S. ___, 125 S. Ct. 2129 (2005), http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-368.pdf
• Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co., 2005 WL 2401626 (D.Kan. Sept. 29, 2005), http://www.ksd.uscourts.gov/opinions/032200JWLDJW-3333.pdf
• Zubulake v. UBS Warburg, 229 F.R.D. 422 (S.D.N.Y. July 20, 2004)(Zubulake V), http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/04-05292.pdf

Orders

• Order for Preservation of Documents signed by Judge Scheindlin in In re: Methyl Tertriary Butyl Ether ("MTBE" Products Liability Litigation, MDL 1358 (SAS) M21-88 (March 15, 2005)

Law Review Articles

• S. Scheindlin and K. Wangkeo, eDiscovery Sanctions in the 21st Century, 11 Mich. TELECOMM. TECH. L. REV. 71 (2004), http://www.mttlr.org/voleleven/scheindlin.pdf

Other Resources

• ABA Civil Discovery Standards, http://www.abanet.org/litigation/discoverystandards/2004civildiscoverystandards.pdf
• Best Practices for the Selection of Electronic Discovery Vendors, The Sedona Conference, http://www.thesedonaconference.org/dltForm?did=RFP_plus_july05ver.pdf
• Microsoft submission to the Federal Rules Advisory Committee, http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/e-discovery/04-CV-001.pdf#page=29
• Proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/newrules1.html
• Sedona Principles, The, The Sedona Conference, http://www.thesedonaconference.org/dltForm?did=7_05TSP.pdf

More Categories

Legal Requirements

There exists a variety of applicable rules, regulations and case law regarding the duty to preserve electronically stored information.

Preservation Letters

It is becoming commonplace for a party who seeks information in a dispute to issue a preservation letter to the adverse party that it will eventually be seeking information from.

Considerations Before the Duty to Preserve Arises

Because the duty to preserve is one that hinges on the timing of its attachment, it is of vital importance to be proactive in preparing an environment in which compliant preservation will be possible.

Implementation of Preservation

When considering the scope of the preservation obligation, it should be noted that not all cases are created equal.

Additional Materials

A list of additional resources on this topic.