Judge Shira Scheindlin Opines on the Future of e-Discovery
Shira A. Scheindlin is a United States District Court judge for the Southern District of New York and she presided over the pivotal e-discovery case Zubulake vs. UBS Warburg. Her rulings, known as Zubulake 1 through 5 set presidents for the practice of e-discovery. Ralph Losey is an attorney and frequent blogger on e-discovery.
Judge Scheindlin and Ralph recently participated in a podcast focusing on e-discovery education. Judge Scheindlin included several observations about the state of e-discovery; however, her comments on the state of, and future of, e-discovery are insightful. Speaking of the future of e-discovery, she said:
We used to say there’s e-discovery as if it was a subset of all discovery. But now there’s no other discovery. [Emphasis added.]
As an e-discovery expert, I’ve had countless attorneys and even some judges argue that e-discovery is one of the worst ideas any litigator every heard of—that e-discovery is not needed. I’ve heard attorneys tell me that they have agreed with opposing counsel that a particular case does not “need” e-discovery. [More about that in another posting!]
Since 90 % of new communication is said to be done electronically, I’m certain that she is correct in judging the pervasiveness of e-discovery in future litigation. I’m sending copies of her remarks to a bunch of the attorneys I know who share the attitude that they can ignore e-discovery if they wish.
I welcome questions and comments.
