ABA TECHSHOW's "Effective Preparation for Rule 26(f) Conference" Session a Great Eye-opener

Amy Juers, founder and CEO of Edge Legal Marketing (http://www.edgelegalmarketing.com) and national director of marketing and PR of Women in eDiscovery, had the pleasure to sit in on a session at the ABA TECHSHOW (http://www2.americanbar.org/calendar/TECHSHOW/Pages/default.aspx) just the other week. Presenters included Craig Ball, David Chaumette and Honorable David Waxse and the session title was “Effective Preparation for Rule 26(f) Conference.” Under the new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the meet and confer conference is more critical than ever. This panel focused on the critical information you need to effectively prepare for the conference, the information you need to share with your opponent and the court, and effective methods for negotiating forms of production.

 
Craig brought a bit of nostalgia back for some as his opening slide stated “e-discovery is people = soylent green is people” and the audience got a good chuckle out of that! David’s thought on an effective “meet and confer” was that the parties must ask the right questions. David was able to bring a lot of practical advice to the table which was welcomed by the audience. Hon. Waxse stated the purpose of Rule 26(f) is that it should resolve disputes in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner. He also said it exists to help parties cooperate better. Craig offered practical examples and steps to a successful meet and confer and said that if not now, but soon, lawyers will be asked in a meet and confer what their clients are doing to preserve electronically stored information. Craig then said, if you haven’t dealt with ESI, it is only a matter of time. The three panelists talked about different difficult situations of productions and production methods, especially when it came to dynamic sources or technology such as proprietary databases, Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and Microsoft PowerPoint presentations. There is often data behind the data, or hidden data, that you can’t see in a TIFF production. It is important to consider special handing of these types of data, and how to address them in a meet and confer. The overriding conclusion of the panel was about education and how, as an attorney, young or old, do you keep up with technology.

 

Around this time of the presentation, panelists were discussing how lawyers don’t always ask the right questions which can lead to missing information or having to go back and rework production forms and production sets. There is a lot being missed or done incorrectly (or even as malpractice as Craig said) when it comes to the meet and confer process…they were painting a picture of gloom and doom, and then Wasxe said…
 




“You know, let me add one hopeful thing, I got a chance to review a new software product that’s patent-pending and is not out yet, but it is going to try and set up a structure for the Rule 26(f) conference because everybody says it is a process, not a one-time thing, and the idea of this structure they’re setting up will be simply that by following the steps and the structure and filling out the information and having the conversations that are required, it will get all of these things done that are now not being done. I am actually kind of anxious for them to get it developed because I think there are a lot of lawyers that need that kind of help in getting through these discussions.”
 



With that statement, there were no further question and the panel was closed. This session was a great eye-opener for many in the room and it will be good to continue to watch the industry come to terms with 26 (f) and success.