H.R. 6610: To amend the Federal Rules of Evidence to address the waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine

Texas Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee (D) has introduced HR 6610, a bill that is in the first step in the legislative process toward having a new, codified law governing inadvertent disclosure and waiver of attorney-client and work product privileges.

For the full text of the bill see govtrack.us.

Advertisements

One Response

  1. “ E-discovery – Indian laws need to witness sea changes and conversions to adapt to the new age of electronic information.”

    Paper documents were considered as the best documentary evidence in Indian courts for centuries. Today, documents are rarely handwritten. Most documents are created using personal computers or E-mail programs. Professionals rely upon personal computers to maintain diaries and to create their written communications. Most computer users have become prolific writers because of the convenience that computers provide. More documentary evidence exists today than ever before and it exists in a variety of electronically stored formats. However, a majority of computer-created documents are never printed on paper. Many are exchanged over the Internet and are read on the computer screen. Thus, the legal document discovery process has drastically changed as it relates to computer created documents.

    LAWYERS AND JUDGES are seeking production of the entire computer hard disk drives, floppy diskettes, zip disks and even cell phones and palm computer devices. These new forms of documentary evidence have broadened the potentials for legal discovery. Unfortunately, our legal system has not kept pace with computer technology and the new document discovery requirements and electronic data. Electronic documents and its discovery should change the way lawyers and the courts do business in India .

    Under the current legal system an increasing quantity of information relevant to civil and criminal cases is stored electronically , rather than on traditional paper form. Despite this development, there has been no widespread study or debate as to whether the provisions of our Criminal procedure code, Civil procedure code and Evidence act adequately address the difficult issues that frequently arise when evidence is stored in electronic form.

    We cannot assume that the same rules applicable to the discovery of traditional form of evidence can be applied to electronic data. I have great concern on this wrong assumption. We need to have simple but important changes in our existing laws to adapt to the new age of electronic information.

    We need to change our current legal system which is complex and outdated. We need laws that promote technology based services. Our existing discipline of law need to witness sea changes and conversions with the help of technology. Litigation support products/technology should evolve rapidly over the next few years and become part of our legal system more vital than they are today. They should be designed to prepare lawyers, law firms and legal departments to try a case, which includes interviewing witnesses, discovery of documents, document review, and case preparation. Litigation support services should help lawyers to reduce their costs, increase efficiency, and improve the quality of their work product so that they can focus on the practice of law.

    Vinod Kuriakose- vinodkuriakose@gmail.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: