Rule 26(b)

Bill Speros wrote the following:

Even after law school, years of study, and active involvement in hundreds e-discovery projects, I have to admit–even to you, an expert–that Rule 26 befuddles me.  Seems as though it imposes costs on clients that are not bounded, risks on law firms that are not mitigated, and converts discourse from the merits to allegations of abuse of process.
 
But now, after viewing the video you forwarded, I understand Rule 26’s place…
 
Bill is, of course, referring to the fine explanation of Rule 26(b) I found on Ralph Loseys site and I urge everyone to view it and then look at the fine ED educational site maintained by Iron Mountain for more of the same information.
 
Advertisements

One Response to Rule 26(b)

  1. Ralph Losey says:

    The sequential Bate stampesque analysis of Iron Mountain has been invaluable in my understanding of the rule. It is good to put things into perspective. It reminds me of the serious approach that Bill Speros frequently takes in his work.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: