LEDES Adds Activity, Expense to E-Discovery Billing Codes

The Legal Electronic Data Exchange Standards organization is following up last year's work on e-discovery billing codes with codes for e-discovery activity and expense, reports Evan Koblentz.

The codes are intended to provide greater insight into the e-discovery billing process by providing a uniform standard for law firms, corporate legal departments, vendors, and clients to itemize and evaluate e-discovery work. They align with the Electronic Discovery Reference Model and the EDRM Metrics Cube, the organization's model to represent how metrics codes fit into the e-discovery process. The new codes include the A100 series for activities and X300 for expenses; last year's billing codes are known as the L600 series.

Although industry experts welcome the effort to provide greater transparency into e-discovery costs, the LEDES codes have only seen modest adoption by e-discovery vendors.

Read the full article on LTN online.

Image by LEDES

Cowen Group "Critical Trends" 2Q Report Shows EDD Surge

Good news from The Cowen Group: Thursday, the headhunter/research consultancy released its "2012 2Q Critical Trends" report, showing a huge surge in electronic data discovery workload at both law firms and corporate counsel offices -- to the tune of 70% and 77% respectively.

That's not all the good news -- according to the 88 respondents, both types of shops are pullin' out checkbooks and buying or upgrading tech, and hiring.

Check out the story here.

Image: Monica Bay

3rd Circuit Issues Race Tires Decision on Taxing EDD Costs

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its long-awaited decision in Race Tires America, Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire Corp on March 16, 2011. The court took a narrow view of whether all the charges imposed by electronic discovery vendors to produce ESI can be taxed against the losing party per the cost-taxation statute, 28 U.S.C. 1920(4).

In short, the court held that only costs of making copies were taxable and that many costs associated with other tasks performed by the e-discovery vendor were not recoverable under the statute.

The court acknowledges that there may be good reasons to award e-discovery costs to a prevailing party; however, the courts lack authority to do so under the cost-taxation statute.

3rd Circuit Hears Oral Arguments in Race Tires

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held oral argument on Monday in Race Tires America Inc., v. Hoosier  No. 11-2316 (3rd Cir. 2011) involving e-discovery cost taxation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1). Philip Yannella’s recent LTN article addresses this hot topic and this specific case in Could E-Discovery Taxation Alter Discovery Paradigm?  

On Nov. 28, I reported on another appellate decision, In Re RICOH Company, LTD. Patent Litigation, No. 20-11-1199, (Fed. Cir. November 23, 2011), addressing EDD cost taxation in Federal Circuit Federal Circuit Takes on Database Cost Taxation.

The Third Circuit panel asked wide ranging and insightful questions involving the American Rule requiring each party to pay their own legal fees, cooperation, cost shifting and  cost reasonableness.  While we will have to wait until Third Circuit issues its opinion, you can listen to the argument and form your own opinion as to the direction the court will rule.

Image: Clipart.com