Reserve Your Rights: Always Ask for Native
As the document production trend continues to move almost exclusively towards electronic formats, make sure you always indicate in your Request for Production of Documents the specific request that certain information may be requested in native format. This preserves your right to request documents that are not produced in a reasonable usable format to be produced later in a usable manner. Often times the most desirable, usable format is native especially if you anticipate Excel spreadsheets or drafts of contracts that may have hidden formulas or other information such as track changes.
Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 34(B) provides in part, “The request may specify the form or forms in which electronically stored information is to be produced.” Make sure you always put in the request a possible need for native because you never know when it may become crucial in a case. If you do not specify native format, opposing counsel can rely on Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 34(B)(3) which states, “If a request does not specify the form or forms for producing electronically stored information, a responding party may produce the information in a form or forms in which the information is ordinarily maintained… or in any form that is reasonably usable.”
Again, always specify the electronic format that you are most comfortable using when reviewing documents. However, beware of the opposing counsel who produces thousands of documents in the format you specify, but in a nearly unusable manner − like one gigantic PDF without document breaks of any kind, or single page TIFs that cannot be easily converted.
Topics
- Branding
- Intellectual Property
- Social Networking Sites
- Privacy Laws
- MySpace
- Stored Communications Act of 1986
- Social Media Content
- RFP
- Evidence
- Privacy
- Social Media
- E-Discovery Project Plan
- E-Discovery Case Law
- 2006 FRCP E-Discovery Amendments
- Digital copier hard drive security
- Native Format of Documents
- Cloud Computing
- Technology
- Zubulake
- Sanctions
- Email Retention
- Sedona Conference
- Rule 34
- Rule 26
- Rule 1
- Federal Rule
- Cooperation Proclamation
- Risk Assessment
- Electronic Data Discovery
- EDD Processing
- Bet-the-Company Litigation
- TREC Legal Track
- Litigation
- ESI
- E-Discovery
- Outsourcing
- Document Review
Contributors
Subscribe to RSS
Recent Posts
- E-Discovery Vendor or Partner: It’s All in the Name
- Ex Parte Discovery Permitted in Website Trademark Infringement and Defamation Case
- Be Careful What You Post: Social Networks Are Discoverable
- Retrieving Discoverable E-Discovery Data from Social Media Sites: Or, "Wow, is this what I asked for?!"
- Court Rules on Social Media Sites' Privacy Settings
- Always Have A Plan
- Your E-Discovery GPS: Are You on the Right Track?
- "Massive" E-Discovery Failures Result in $8.5 Million Sanction
- Oh the stories a copier can tell!
- Does Your Law Firm Follow ESI Best Practices

