Is eDiscovery Able to Facilitate Interrogatories and Disclosures?

, ,

In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the court looked at whether eDiscovery facilitated interrogatories as they pertain to early fact disclosure. In re: Domestic Drywall Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 2437, 2014 WL 1909260 (E.D. Pa. may 12, 2014) (Baylson, J.).

Defendants moved to compel Plaintiffs to respond to two interrogatories that sought identification of the products, alleged conspirer, and the acts and omissions taken in furtherance of the conspiracy. Plaintiffs objected on the grounds that the interrogatories were premature, which meant that they should not have to answer with detailed factual evidence.

Judge Baylson ultimately disagreed with the prematurity of the interrogatories, citing: 1. How frequent exchange of information benefits fair discovery; 2. How information exchange facilitates the evaluation of the strengths and weakness of a case; and 3. How ESI tools enable parties to use search terms and other methods to quickly identify relevant information.

Judge Baylson further stated that, “Ignoring the capabilities which ESI allows the parties to search for and produce factual information in a case of this nature is like pretending businesses still communicate by smoke signals.”


ILS – Plaintiff eDiscovery Experts