Recent Developments in Recovering E-Discovery Costs

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

In their Federal E-Discovery column, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison partners H. Christopher Boehning and Daniel J. Toal write that the Third Circuit recently found that a lower court's expansive reading of 28 U.S.C. §1920 went too far, improperly taxing e-discovery costs. However, a federal judge in the Ninth Circuit has decided in two cases to follow the broader and more liberal reading originally offered by the Western District of Pennsylvania.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202557127384

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.