Spring 2016

The Discovery Rules Have Changed But Will We?


The Discovery Rules Have Changed But Will We?

Real change is at hand that should cut the cost of litigation.

Most of us remember something that happened the first (or maybe second or third) time we appeared in court that would not have happened had we been a little more experienced.

Factually baseless plea agreements are an affront to the very principle our justice system was designed to promote: the pursuit of truth and justice.

Overblown fears about drones and privacy risk scuttling our time-tested American notions of openness.

For schoolkids, the topic-sentence model of writing is a good way to learn that structure exists. For professionals, it is a lie.

Three recent developments in Canadian common law have clarified the standards for admitting expert evidence.

If the choice were presented to us today in the stark terms the ancients seemed to favor—a short life of immortal glory or a long life of successful but obscure money making—it seems likely that most of us would chose (indeed, have chosen) the latter.

It doesn’t matter if your client is a sophisticated general counsel or a mug who never made it past sixth grade. They know best.

A lawyer who is not careful in dealing with a constituent may inadvertently create a client-lawyer relationship with the constituent.


  • About Litigation Journal

  • Subscriptions

  • More Information

  • Contact Us

  • Litgation Issue PDFs