Welcome to your Monday morning round-up of stories in today’s edition of The Legal Intelligencer. All of the links below will take you directly to today’s stories, or you can head straight over to The Legal’s homepage. (Some stories may require registration or a paid subscription.)
The top story this morning is a federal judge shifting e-discovery cost toward the plaintiffs in a potential class action. As reporter Saranac Hale Spencer writes, in an apparent case of first impression nationally, given the amount of material already produced by the defendant, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs should pay for further discovery, including both electronic and paper files.
Below the fold on Page 1, reporter Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that Jeffrey B. Rotwitt’s attorneys argued that sanctions over allegedly deficient discovery responses, including the loss of Rotwitt’s defenses, are inappropriate. The issue stems from Rotwitt’s involvement with the Philadelphia family court deal.
In more Regional News on Page 3, Amaris Elliott-Engel writes that a Philadelphia judge has rejected an alternate dispute resolution agreement signed by a medical malpractice plaintiff’s mother as unenforceable.
In a Litigation column on Page 5, Abraham J. Gafni writes about mandatory mediation and avoiding pitfalls by complying with the agreement.
In a Law Technology News column on Page 7, David Cohen and Caitlin Gifford provide an update on e-discovery case law.
If you have questions or comments about any of today's stories, or our coverage as a whole, we invite you to e-mail any of the reporters directly. We hope you'll enjoy today's Legal.