DOCSLIB.ORG

The Philip F. Reed Lecture Series, Panel Discussion, Sanctions in Electronic Discovery Cases: Views from the Judges

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Philip F. Reed Lecture Series, Panel Discussion, Sanctions in Electronic Discovery Cases: Views from the Judges Fordham Law Review Volume 78 Issue 1 Article 1 2009 The Philip F. Reed Lecture Series, Panel Discussion, Sanctions in Electronic Discovery Cases: Views From the Judges Hon. John M. Facciola Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte Hon. Loretta A. Preska Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Hon. John M. Facciola, Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte, Hon. Loretta A. Preska, and Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin, The Philip F. Reed Lecture Series, Panel Discussion, Sanctions in Electronic Discovery Cases: Views From the Judges, 78 Fordham L. Rev. 1 (2009). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol78/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Philip F. Reed Lecture Series, Panel Discussion, Sanctions in Electronic Discovery Cases: Views From the Judges Cover Page Footnote This Panel Discussion was held on February 24, 2009, at Fordham University School of Law. The text of the Panel Discussion transcript has been lightly edited. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol78/iss1/1 FORDHAM LAW REVIEW Vol. 78 October 2009 No. 1 CONTENTS THE PHILIP D. REED LECTURE SERIES Panel Discussion SANCTIONS IN ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY CASES: VIEWS FROM THE JUDGES ..... Hon. John M. Facciola, Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte, Hon. Loretta A. Preska & Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin ESSAY A MATTER OF CONTEXT: SOCIAL FRAMEWORK EVIDENCE IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CLASS ACTIONS ................. Melissa Hart 37 & Paul M. Secunda ARTICLE TOWARD A DUTY-BASED THEORY OF EXECUTIVE POWER ...................... David M. Driesen 71 NOTES POST-DAviS CONDUIT BONDS: AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE AND MUNICIPAL DEBT ....... Sean Carey 121 BEST EVIDENCE AND THE WAYBACK MACHINE: TOWARD A WORKABLE AUTHENTICATION STANDARD FOR ARCHIVED INTERNET EVIDENCE ................................. Deborah R. Eltgroth 181 "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE": THE NSA, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008, AND FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE OF AMERICANS OVERSEAS ............... Jonathan D. Forgang 217 WHAT THE RIGHT HAND GIVES: PROHIBITIVE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE STATE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO BAIL ......... Ariana Lindermayer 267 AN ANALYSIS OF THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION'S SELECTION OF TRANSFEREE DISTRICT AND JUDGE ........ Daniel A. Richards 311 PROTECTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS: THE STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT .................. Alexander Scolnik 349 A CLOSE LOOK AT ADEA MIXED-MOTIVES CLAIMS AND GROSS v. FBL FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC......................... Leigh A. Van Ostrand 399 THE PHILIP D. REED LECTURE SERIES PANEL DISCUSSION SANCTIONS IN ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY CASES: VIEWS FROM THE JIUDGES* PANELISTS Hon. John M. Facciola Judge, Districtof Columbia Hon. Elizabeth D. Laporte Judge, Northern District of California Hon. Loretta A. Preska Judge, Southern District of New York Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin Judge, Southern District of New York MODERATOR Daniel J. Capra Reed Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law Reporter to the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules PROFESSOR CAPRA: Good evening. My name is Dan Capra. I have the honor of occupying the Philip Reed Chair. The Philip Reed Chair-I have had that since 1992, when it was instituted-is funded by the generosity of the Philip Reed Foundation. Philip Reed was one of the most accomplished Fordham graduates ever. He was a general counsel of GE for many years, and he gave back to the school. I'm very happy about that. I would say parenthetically that the chair was supposed to be a rotating chair. It was supposed to rotate every three years, but I have been in it for * This Panel Discussion was held on February 24, 2009, at Fordham University School of Law. The text of the Panel Discussion transcript has been lightly edited. FORDHAM LA W REVIEW [Vol. 78 twelve years, and nobody has tried to move me out. Actually, Philip Reed Jr. has said he still wants me here. So, I'm very happy to be here and very happy to be putting on these programs. The program tonight is a judges' panel on sanctions in electronic discovery. I would just like to set the table very quickly. We are going to get to a lot of issues tonight, and there is a lot of stuff to discuss. The explosion of electronic information has had a profound impact on the discovery process, as I'm sure most of you are aware. Instead of single hard copies of documents, where all the drafts are destroyed, now electronic information has multiple iterations, strings of emails and the like, and often it's not destroyed in any kind of permanent sense. So electronic discovery raises difficult issues of, among other things, preservation, retrieval, and production. Many lawyers involved in electronic discovery are not really up-to-date on the special challenges that are presented by discovery of electronic information, including interfacing with IT people and trying to understand IT-speak. So there is a lot of getting-up-to-speed on this. The result, I think, is that many parties in litigation-and lawyers, as well as parties-end up not producing all of the electronic data that is discoverable or end up producing it so late in the process that the adversary is prejudiced. We are taking that as kind of the background for our panel tonight. The questions that the panel will discuss tonight are as follows: " When and whether to impose sanctions for nonproduction or delayed production of electronic data. " If the decision has been made to sanction, which of the many sanction options are appropriate in any particular circumstance? We are most fortunate to have a panel of distinguished judges who are nationally known voices on the subject of electronic discovery in general and on sanctions in particular. The bios will be brief, because they could just take up the whole night. So we are going to be real quick about that. I'll proceed by alphabetical order. Judge John Facciola, Magistrate Judge for the District Court of the District of Columbia, has been a magistrate judge since 1997; author of many important opinions on electronic discovery; a frequent speaker and prolific author on electronic discovery topics-very readable opinions, I have found. Very readable opinions. He is a former adjunct professor at Georgetown and Catholic Law Schools and a former Editor-in-Chief of the Federal Courts Law Review. Next, Judge Elizabeth Laporte, Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of California, has been a magistrate judge since 1998. She is also a respected speaker and frequent speaker on e-discovery and other topics and a respected author in the area. Her Fordham connection: she's a former clerk of Marilyn Hall Patel, who is a Fordham graduate; a very respected member of the judiciary. 2009] SANCTIONS IN E-DISCOVERY CASES She is a member of the Jury Trial Improvement Committee of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and she is a judicial observer for the Sedona Conference Working Group on Electronic Document Retention and Production. Next, Judge Loretta Preska, District Judge for the Southern District of New York, a district judge since 1992, one of Fordham Law School's most distinguished graduates. A true friend of the Law School. I'm honored to have her here tonight. Judge Preska is a trustee of Fordham University since September 2007. The Fordham Alumni Association awarded her its Medal of Achievement in 1998. She's a member of the Board of Directors of the Federal Judicial Center (FJC) and trains new judges in the famed "Baby Judges School" of the FJC. She is the author of dozens of influential opinions, the most important one for tonight being the opinion in the Metropolitan Opera case,' which set the standard for determining whether to impose a default judgment for electronic discovery violations. 2 Finally, Judge Shira Scheindlin, District Judge for the Southern District of New York, whose-I'm going to add this; I wrote it down and I'm going to read it-whose sense of professionalism and work ethic I try unsuccessfully to emulate every day. Appointed to the bench in 1994, she clerked for the late Judge Brieant and served previously as a magistrate judge in the Eastern District of New York. She's the author of the landmark Zubulake opinion, 3 which blazed the trail for many difficult electronic discovery issues, including determining whether electronic information is reasonably accessible, the duties of lawyers in managing the client's electronic discovery obligations, the use of adverse inference instructions, which she will talk about tonight, and the protocol for determining whether the costs of retrieving electronic 4 data should be shared. She is a former member of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Civil Rules and was instrumental in the development of the 2006 electronic discovery amendments to the Civil Rules. 5 She is the coauthor of the first published casebook on electronic discovery and digital evidence, which is right here. 6 So that's our panel. Before I kind of dive in quickly, I'd like to thank the Law Review for their outstanding efforts on our behalf in getting people here and being here. I really, really appreciate it. These proceedings will 1. Metro. Opera Ass'n, Inc. v. Local 100, Hotel Employees & Rest. Employees Int'l Union, 212 F.R.D. 178 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 2. See id. at 218-20. 3. Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC (Zubulake V), 229 F.R.D.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2011 Table of Contents
    AABANY Year-End Report for 2011 Table of Contents AABANY Year-End Report for 2011 ...................................................................................................... 1 Academic Committee Report ................................................................................................................. 12 Audit and Finance Committee Report .................................................................................................... 13 Communications Committee Report ...................................................................................................... 14 Corporate Law Committee ..................................................................................................................... 15 Government and Public Sector Committee ............................................................................................ 16 Immigration and Nationality Law Committee ........................................................................................ 17 In-House Counsel Committee ................................................................................................................. 18 Intellectual Property Committee ............................................................................................................. 19 Issues Committee .................................................................................................................................... 22 Judiciary Committee ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • New York Law School Magazine, Vol. 33, No. 2 New York Law School
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu NYLS Publications New York Law School Alumni Magazine 2014 New York Law School Magazine, Vol. 33, No. 2 New York Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/alum_mag Recommended Citation New York Law School, "New York Law School Magazine, Vol. 33, No. 2" (2014). New York Law School Alumni Magazine. Book 1. http://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/alum_mag/1 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the NYLS Publications at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in New York Law School Alumni Magazine by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. Office of Marketing and Communications 185 West Broadway Magazine • 2014 • VOL. 33, nO. 2 New York, NY 10013-2921 SAVE THE DATE REUNION AND ALUMNI WEEKEND APRIl 23–25, 2015 Mark your calendars, and plan to celebrate New York Law School! The 2015 Reunion and Alumni Weekend is shaping up to be an extraordinary occasion for classes ending in 0 and 5—and for the entire NYLS community. You won’t want to miss it! Reunion Year Class Volunteers Needed Do you want to make sure your class is well represented at Reunion? E-mail [email protected] to join your class committee. cOngresswOMan nancY peLOsi The fuTure is nOw: nYLs Makes DeLiVers The shainwaLD pubLic iMpressiVe prOgress On achieVing inTeresT LecTure sTraTegic pLan gOaLs www.nyls.edu P6 P8 WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL SINCE 1891 The Center for New York City Law marked its 20th year WE ARE NEW YORK’S LAW SCHOOL of presenting the CityLaw Breakfast Series in September, when it hosted Carl Weisbrod, Chair of the NYC Planning Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • THE NEW YORK EMPLOYEE ADVOCATE Nelanational Employment Lawyers Association/New York • Advocates for Employee Rights
    THE NEW YORK EMPLOYEE ADVOCATE NELANational Employment Lawyers Association/New York • Advocates for Employee Rights VOLUME 11, NO. 7 December 2003 Jonathan Ben-Asher, Editor Members to Vote in NELA Board Elections Filings, Trials and Settlements This fall, the NELA/NY Board of NELA/NY’s Executive Director, Shelley Directors revised NELA/NY’s Bylaws to Leinheardt, on or before December 5, In this column, we publish cases provide that the membership will vote to 2004. which NELA/NY members have fill two vacant seats on the Board each Statements in support of a candidate recently filed, tried or settled. Please year. The new procedures go into effect will be provided to each member either send information on your cases to this year, for the election of the 2004 electronically or in hard copy. In addi- Jonathan Ben-Asher at jb-a@bmbf. Board. tion, on December 10 we are holding an com. Please include the parties, Up to now, members of NELA New Open Membership Meeting, during which court, counsel for both sides, a short York’s Board of Directors have been candidates can discuss their interests and description of the underlying facts elected each December, by the current views. (6:00 p.m., at the office of Bern- and issues, and anything else which Board. In 2001, the Board revised the stein, Litowitz, Berger & Grossman, 1285 you think your colleagues would Bylaws so that Board members may only Avenue of the Americas). find particularly tantalizing. serve for five consecutive years. To put No later than December 22, 2003, Shel- Unfortunately, we have had only that change into effect, several Board ley will be sending to each member, by a few submissions for this issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Confirmation Hearing on Hon. Susan H. Black, Sonia Sotomayor, Loretta A
    CONFIRMATION HEARING ON HON. SUSAN H. BLACK, SONIA SOTOMAYOR, LORETTA A. PRESKA, AND IRENE M. KEELEY THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 1992 U.S. SENATE, COMMITrEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in room SD-226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Ion. Edward M. Kennedy presiding. Present: Senators Kennedy and Thurmond. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KENNEDY Senator KENNEDY. The committee will come to order. The Constitution gives the President and the SE.nate a shared re- sponsibility to ensure that qualified men and women serve on the Federal bench. As Senators, we have few more important responsi- bilities than our role in the confirmation process. The judges and Justices whom we approve will serve for life, and their decisions will determine, in large measure, the quality of justice in America. I am please to note that today, for the first time, the Judiciary Committee has scheduled a nominations hearing in which all of the nominees are women. This is a welcome development and under- scores our commitment to increasing the representation of women on the Federal bench. In the past 12 years, the proportion of women in the legal profes- sion has almost doubled, from 13 percent during the last year of the Carter administration to 23 percent today. Yet, only 16 percent of President Bush's judicial nominees are women, about the same as the 15-percent rate President Carter achieved during a time when there were far fewer women lawyers. Less than 9 percent of the sitting Federal judges are women.
    [Show full text]
  • Consequences of Mandated Bank Liquidity Disclosures
    Consequences of Mandated Bank Liquidity Disclosures Anya Kleymenova* London Business School Regent’s Park London NW1 4SA, UK [email protected] November 2013 PRELIMINARY Please do not quote or circulate without permission. Abstract This paper studies the capital market consequences of unique and unexpected mandatory disclosures of banks’ liquidity and the resulting changes in banks’ behavior. I employ a hand-collected sample of the disclosures of banks’ borrowing from the US Federal Reserve Discount Window (DW) during the financial crisis. I find that these disclosures contain positive incremental market information as they decrease banks’ cost of capital (measured by the equity bid-ask spreads and the cost of debt). However, I also find evidence of endogenous costs associated with more disclosure. I document that banks respond to the DW disclosures by increasing their liquidity holdings and decreasing risky assets. In line with the theoretical predictions of Goldstein and Sapra (2013), this finding indicates that, following the DW disclosures, banks try to avoid accessing the DW facility, despite its cost of capital benefits. JEL classification: G18, G21, G28, M41 Keywords: Liquidity disclosure, discount window, consequences of disclosure, bank liquidity, prudential regulation of banks. * I started work on this paper during my PhD research internship at the Bank of England. I would like to thank the chair of my dissertation committee, Florin Vasvari, as well as Rhiannon Sowerbutts from the Bank of England for their generous support and guidance throughout this project. Discussions with Pat Akey, Allen Berger, Christa Bouwman, Michael Crawley (discussant), Emmanuel De George, Atif Ellahie, Sapnoti Eswar, John Kuong, Elizabeth Klee, Yun Lou, Maria Loumioti, Clemens Otto, Richard Rosen (discussant), Oded Rozenbaum, Oleg Rubanov, Tjomme Rusticus, Stephen Schaefer, Sasan Saiy (discussant), Haresh Sapra, İrem Tuna, Oktay Urcan, Joana Valente, Robert Verrecchia, and Irina Zviadadze have been extremely helpful.
    [Show full text]
  • The Judicial Front in the War on Terror Transcript
    The Relationship Between Chemistry and Law Interviewer Okay, today is November the 18th. We are at West Point at the studio of the Center for Oral History with Judge Loretta Preska, the Chief Judge of the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Loretta Preska Exactly. Interviewer Could you spell your name for the transcriber? Just want to make sure we have it accurately. Loretta Preska Certainly. L-O-R-E-T-T-A, middle initial A, Preska, P-R-E-S-K-A. Interviewer Now is that a—what is the— Loretta Preska Lithuanian. Interviewer Lithuanian—wow. Shortened, or is that the way it was? Loretta Preska My father thinks that the S and the K were reversed, and it was Preksa. Interviewer Ah—very interesting. So, let’s begin by asking—I’ll ask just what we always do, where you come from and how you ended up in the law in this case. And then we’ll eventually get to discussing the subjects that have more direct relationship with West Point and the story of the soldier. Loretta Preska Certainly. I was born in Albany, New York, and grew up outside of Albany in Delmar. My father built our house on his family’s farm property. I went to schools in the area and attended the College of Saint Rose in Albany on a scholarship. I was a chemistry major at Saint Rose and very well served by it. In the summer before my senior year in college, I received a National Science Foundation grant to do what I thought I wanted to do, which was organic chemistry research.
    [Show full text]
  • Judge William C
    Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court Reception and Dinner onn . C er C I m N a N i l o l f i C W o . u N r O t H I P N e 8 w 00 York 2 January 17, 2018 The Union League Club of New York Judge William C. Conner Mission of the Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court The mission of the Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court is to promote excellence in professionalism, ethics, civility, and legal skills for judges, lawyers, academicians, and students of law and to advance the education of the members of the Inn, the members of the bench and bar, and the public in the fields of intellectual property law. At our Inaugural Dinner in 2009, we presented Mrs. Conner with a bouquet of her favorite flowers - yellow roses. Honorable William C. Conner passed away on July 9, 2009. His wife, Janice Files Conner, passed away on September 12, 2011. We continue to commemorate Mrs. Conner every year with yellow roses on the tables at our Annual Dinner. Program Reception • 6:00 pm Dinner • 7:00 pm Presentations 2018 Conner Inn Justice Awards to Distingished Senior Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and U.S. District for the Southern District of New York 2018 Conner Inn Excellence Award to Hon. Pierre N. Leval Senior Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Presented by Hon. J. Paul Oetken District Judge, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Dinner Journal
    Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court Reception and Dinner January 17, 2012 The Union League Club of New York Judge William C. Conner Mission of the Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court The mission of the Hon. William C. Conner Inn of Court is to promote excellence in professionalism, ethics, civility, and legal skills for judges, lawyers, academicians, and students of law and to advance the education of the members of the Inn, the members of the bench and bar, and the public in the fields of intellectual property law. In Memoriam Janice Conner Janice Conner, wife of Hon. William C. Conner, passed away on September 12, 2011. She was a special guest and friendly face at Judge Conner’s side for many intellectual property gather- ings, including the Inaugural Conner Inn Dinner in 2009. Her family placed this article in the Austin American-Statesman. anice Files Conner was born September 2, 1922, man could ever have” recognizing that she made J in Itasca, Texas to Janie and Sidney Files. Her his “Lucky Life,” as a distinguished Federal Judge identical twin sister Joyce arrived seven minutes and father, possible. Their blissful union spanned later, leading to a life of gently teasing her sister for more than 66 years, mostly as residents of Dobbs never being on time. Jan was a brilliant and dedi- Ferry, NY, next door to Irvington where her twin cated student, graduating Summa cum Laude from settled, creating everlasting confusion amongst the the University of Texas before earning a Masters in locals. Jan was the most wonderful, clever Mom Dietetics at Johns Hopkins University.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial and Federal Litigation Section Newsletter a Publication of the Commercial and Federal Litigation Section of the New York State Bar Association
    NYSBA SUMMER 2008 | Vol. 14 | No. 2 Commercial and Federal Litigation Section Newsletter A publication of the Commercial and Federal Litigation Section of the New York State Bar Association A Message from the A Message from the Outgoing Chair Incoming Chair It is with a great sense of I am pleased and honored productivity and pride that I to write to you for the fi rst time pass the chairpersonship of this as Chair of the Commercial and Section to your new Chair, Peter Federal Litigation Section. The Brown. The intelligence, hard responsibilities of Chair are a work, and dedication of our personal challenge, as I strive to Section members are outstand- meet the high standards of the ing and, as a result, the Section distinguished series of Bar lead- had a tremendous year: we had ers who have preceded me. I am record-breaking attendance at honored to serve this year under our Annual and Spring Meet- Carrie H. Cohen New York State Bar Association Peter Brown ings, numerous written reports President Bernice Leber. Bernice from our committees on timely litigation topics, and began her extraordinary record of Bar leadership as fantastic CLE programs. Chair of this Section. She is a dynamic leader, who will lead the Association to exceed the expectations of the lawyers of New York. (Continued on page 2) (Continued on page 2) Inside Section Welcomes New Officers: Use of Diagrams and Photographs in Appellate Briefs Jonathan D. Lupkin and Victoria Zaydman ............................... 4 in New York State Courts ............................................................14 Report on the Spring Meeting ............................................................5 Section Supports Celebration of Cultural Diversity in the New York Legal Community ......................................................18 Committee Spotlight: (Kathy M.
    [Show full text]
  • Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial
    Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law Volume 15 Issue 1 Article 7 2010 Backdoor Bailout Disclosure: Must The Federal Reserve Disclose The Identities Of Its Borrowers Under The Freedom Of Information Act? Alexander Sellinger Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl Recommended Citation Alexander Sellinger, Backdoor Bailout Disclosure: Must The Federal Reserve Disclose The Identities Of Its Borrowers Under The Freedom Of Information Act?, 15 Fordham J. Corp. & Fin. L. 259 (2009). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl/vol15/iss1/7 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Backdoor Bailout Disclosure: Must The Federal Reserve Disclose The Identities Of Its Borrowers Under The Freedom Of Information Act? Cover Page Footnote J.D. Candidate, 2010, Fordham University School of Law; B.A., 2007 University of Virginia. The author is deeply indebted to Prof. Caroline Gentile for her guidance, insight and patience with this Note. He is also grateful for the hard work, honest feedback, and input of fellow members of the Journal of Corporate & Financial Law, especially Noe Burgos, Nicole Conner and Gary Varnavides. This note is available in Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/jcfl/vol15/iss1/ 7 NOTES BACKDOOR BAILOUT DISCLOSURE: MUST THE FEDERAL RESERVE DISCLOSE THE IDENTITIES OF ITS BORROWERS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT? Alexander Sellinger* I.
    [Show full text]
  • Preska, Hon. Loretta A
    Published December 2013 Judicial Profile by Phil Schatz Hon. Loretta A. Preska Chief U.S. District Judge, Southern District of New York hief Judge Loretta Preska of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) was raised in Delmar, N.Y., a small hamlet in the town of Bethlehem, a suburb of Albany. Her father, Victor, was an ordnance Cdesign engineer for Benet Laboratories at the Watervliet Arsenal. Her mother, Etta Mae, worked as a registered nurse at St. Peter’s Hospital in Albany. Judge Preska had a part-time job at the Delmar Public Library, a passion for chemistry, and a burgundy Mustang. She was captain of the field hockey team and president of the National Honor Society at Bethlehem Central High. Delmar is unquestionably a nice town (a 2005 CNN/ Money Magazine survey ranked it as one of the great American towns), but it’s a small place, and a homogeneous one. Girl Scouting opened up Judge Preska’s world. The Golden Age of Scouting In 1965, her district nominated her to attend the Senior Roundup in Idaho. The Senior Roundup was a big deal, a national aggregation of the most dedicated Senior Girl Scouts in the nation. Places were highly prized and hotly contested. The 1965 Roundup was the largest, and the last, national Roundup. The promotional jacket for the EP 12,000 Girl Scouts Sing America’s National Favorites,1 “presented for your listening pleasure by Ground Maxwell site became a city, vivid with flags of many nations House Coffee,” catches the tenor of the event: and regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside This Issue Federal Litigation Section News on the Docket
    e d i S Summer 2014 • Published by the Federal BLitigation SectionA of the FederalR Bar Association OPENING STATEMENTS Full Steam Ahead persuasive in their comments because they worked to assure Robert E. Kohn consensus among plaintiff- and defendant-oriented practi- tioners. John McCarthy and Michael Zuckerman worked Many members of the Fed. Lit. Section exceptionally hard to seek that consensus within our section. shared their views late last year concern- The successful result obtained by their advocacy is striking. ing proposed amendments to the discov- This section has never been more active and more ery rules in the Federal Rules of Civil engaged in supporting the federal bench and bar than it Procedure. Based on those views, the sec- is right now. On July 11, 2014 in Washington, D.C., for tion and FBA Executive Director Karen Silberman submitted instance, please consider joining Katherine Gonzalez of our comments in the name of the Federal Bar Association. A sub- section’s Governing Board (and me) in attending the FBA’s committee of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Conference on Women in the Law. The Hon. Loretta A. Civil Rules—the “Duke Conference Subcommittee,” chaired Preska, also of our board, will be among the speakers there. by the Hon. John G. Koeltl—took note, and recommended “On the Docket” by Tom McNeill brings us up-to-date on to withdraw the proposals for new presumptive limitations on everything the section has been doing to support the pursuit depositions, interrogatories, and requests for admissions.
    [Show full text]