06.13.2011 Significant New Electronic Discovery Legislation in North Carolina Likely To Become Law
The North Carolina General Assembly has taken a decisive step towards addressing the issue of electronic discovery in the state courts. Recently, the North Carolina House of Representatives passed House Bill 380 (“HB 380”) that would amend various provisions of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure to explicitly incorporate electronically stored information (“ESI”) into the discovery process. HB380 now goes to the Senate for consideration.
Although the House made several minor changes to the language originally proposed in several sections of HB380, none of the revisions would significantly change the scope or effect of the rules proposed in the original version of the bill. The fact that HB380 left the House in largely the same form that it had entered provides a clear indication that the legislation is unlikely to face any significant roadblocks before final passage by the Senate. Indeed, the bill did not receive a single “no” vote in the House. As a result, HB380 is expected to pass by the end of the current legislative session and go into effect on October 1, 2011. As currently written, the rule changes would apply only to litigation filed on or after that date.
The version of HB380 currently under consideration by the Senate is largely identical to the version originally introduced and, if passed in its present form, would:
add ESI as a category of discoverable information under Rule 26(b)(1);
extend the definition of ESI in Rule 26(b)(1) to include certain categories of metadata, an area which is not directly addressed by the FRCP, and could have a significant impact on the preservation and production of metadata by North Carolina litigants;
protect privileged information that is inadvertently disclosed during discovery under Rule 26(b)(7);
create a new procedure for conducting pre-trial discovery planning conferences to discuss e-discovery issues under Rule 26(f);
expand a litigant’s ability to obtain a court-ordered discovery plan to control the scope and boundaries of electronic discovery under Rule 26(f);
allow a party, under certain circumstances, to withhold discoverable ESI that is not reasonably accessible under Rule 34(b); and
protect parties from discovery sanctions when ESI is deleted pursuant to a routine information management system under Rule 37(c).
The Williams Mullen E-Discovery and Information Governance Section will continue to monitor HB380 as it proceeds through the Senate and will issue updates on any significant developments.
For more information about this topic, please contact the author or any member of the Williams Mullen e-Discovery and Information Governance Team.
This newsletter contains general, condensed summaries of actual legal matters, statutes and opinions for information purposes. It is not meant to be and should not be construed as legal advice. Readers with particular needs on specific issues should retain the services of competent counsel. For more information, please visit our website at www.williamsmullen.com or contact Bennett B. Borden, 804.420.6563 or email@example.com or contact Monica McCarroll, 804.420.6444 or firstname.lastname@example.org. For mailing list inquiries or to be removed from this mailing list, please contact Julie Layne at email@example.com or 804.420.6311.