F.R.C.P. 26(f) requires that
all parties confer “as soon as practicable—and in any event at least 21 days
before a scheduling conference is set” to discuss “the nature and basis of
their claims and defenses,” “the possibilities for promptly settling or
resolving the case,” “arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1),”
“discuss any issues about preserving discoverable information,” and “develop a
proposed discovery plan.” The discovery
plan prepared by the parties should address “changes . . . in the timing, form,
or requirements for disclosures under Rule 26(a),” “the subjects on which
discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether
discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused on
particular issues,” “any issues about disclosure or discovery of electronically
stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be
produced,” “any issues about claims of privilege or of protection [of]
trial-preparation materials,” and “what changes should be made in the
limitations on discovery imposed under these rules . . . .”
C.R.C.P. 16(b)(3) provides a similar requirement under
Colorado law, requiring the parties to “no later than 15 days after the case is
at issue . . . confer with each other about the nature and basis of the claims
and defenses; the matters to be disclosed pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(a)(1); and
whether a Modified Case Management Order is necessary.” While the specific requirements of C.R.C.P.
16(b)(3) are less detailed than F.R.C.P. 26(f), it is a best practice to follow
the federal guidelines in state court conferences.
This initial conference is also an excellent opportunity
to outline additional time and cost-saving measures.
One best practice is to provide to opposing counsel via
letter a proposal for the following items.
This serves both to streamline and guide the 26(f) conference and to
create a record of the proposals and good faith efforts made to streamline
discovery.
Consider discussing some or all of the following at a Rule 26(f) conference:
Nature and Basis of Claims
and Defenses:
- Plaintiff should
inquire into anticipated defenses if Answer not yet filed, or for explanation
of affirmative defenses where presented
- Defendant should
inquire into factual basis for claims where not specifically articulated in
Complaint
Settlement:
- Make
initial/follow-on settlement offers if appropriate
- Discuss timing of
future settlement efforts and mediation in light of discovery schedule
Initial Disclosures, ESI,
Preservation of Information, Production Format:
- Discuss scope of
appropriate initial disclosures where appropriate
- Discuss types of ESI that may be relevant, including local storage, networked storage, individual employee computers, smart phones (repositories of text messages and photos), corporate blogs and wikis, individual and corporate social media information on Facebook, blogs, Twitter, corporate voicemail, personal and corporate instant messaging, calendaring systems
- Discuss types of ESI that may be relevant, including local storage, networked storage, individual employee computers, smart phones (repositories of text messages and photos), corporate blogs and wikis, individual and corporate social media information on Facebook, blogs, Twitter, corporate voicemail, personal and corporate instant messaging, calendaring systems
- Where
Electronically Stored Information exists (nearly every case), discuss the
extent and structure of each parties ESI and consider agreeing that the parties
will produce an outline of their ESI storage and structure to streamline
requests and production. Overview of ESI
systems should include discussion of:
- Date ranges for review
- Name and role of ESI custodians
- ESI system types and structure (including
individual workstations, shared drives, etc.
- File types that will be searched
- Search terms that will be used
- Counsel should familiarize
themselves with their own client’s ESI structure and information before the
Rule 26(f) conference
- Consider agreeing
that, following receipt of outline of ESI custodians and structure, each party
may nominate 5 ESI custodians in opposing party for preservation and review
- Discuss format
for production of documents (e.g. PDF files with OCR layer provided by email to
opposing counsel where size permits, otherwise by US Mail or courier)
- Discuss
importance that documents be produced in the order in which they are kept in
the ordinary course of business
- Discuss necessity
and form of protective order for confidential documents
- Agree that, where
native format of ESI differs from production format, parties will additionally
produce document in native-format where specifically requested (i.e. Excel
spreadsheets (.xls), QuickBooks files (.qbb), etc.)
- Address scope of
potentially relevant information including ESI, and appropriate preservation
measures
- Discuss rolling
production time-frames in light of discovery schedule
Privilege Issues:
- Address any
case-specific privilege issues
- Agree on timing
of disclosure of privilege log and format for log
- Agree that documents created after a certain date (often case filing date) need not be included on privilege log
- Agree that documents created after a certain date (often case filing date) need not be included on privilege log
- Agree to
claw-back provision that inadvertent production will not waive privilege
- Consider agreeing
that each side may designate up to 20 documents from privilege log for
in-camera inspection
Proposed Discovery Plan (for
inclusion in proposed scheduling order):
- Discuss potential
for informal discovery
- Number and names
of deponents and time limitations, location
- Number of written
discovery requests
- Discuss number
and deadline for disclosure of expert witness reports
- Discuss whether
limitation/elimination of expert depositions is appropriate
Additional Cost/Time-Saving
Measures
- Agree that all
discovery disputes will be discussed by phone call between counsel, not via
letter
- Agree that all
depositions will be scheduled by agreement (no unilateral notices)
- Agree that all
deposition exhibits will be numbered sequentially
- Agree that, if
FRCP don’t apply, neither side will be entitled to communications with experts not
discoverable under FRCP 26(a)(2)
The agreements reached during the Rule 26(f) conference,
as well as the competing views of the parties where no agreement was reached,
should be documented in a joint report to the Court that must be filed within
14 days after the conference.
This post provides general
legal information. It is not legal
advice tailored to your specific factual situation.
0 comments:
Post a Comment