A Delaware Chancery ruling sanctions WWE’s leadership for manually shortening Signal’s auto-delete settings after receiving two separate written litigation holds telling them not to, and it applies a standard most litigators don’t realize is different from the federal one: recklessness, not intent. It’s also the sharpest illustration yet of why an individually owned, encrypted messaging
eDiscovery Bytes
Blog Authors
Latest from eDiscovery Bytes
The AI Company Is the Evidence Now: What Britannica v. Perplexity Teaches About RAG and UAL Discovery
This week’s case teaches litigators and discovery professionals how AI works, and what they need to know to ask for the discovery of AI generated evidence. A Southern District of New York court ordered Perplexity AI to produce snapshots of its own retrieval database and months of its own user activity logs in a copyright…
Disney v. Midjourney: When the Gen AI Output Is the Evidence
Two stipulated orders in the biggest generative AI copyright case in the country set out how to produce subscriber prompts and the images and video they generated: a sample of 385 per character, drawn by a published method anyone can rerun, backed by a signed certification and a list of every record in the eligible…
Why Agreeing on Short Message Data Context is Critical
A Northern District of Indiana court just built a second formula for giving context to short Microsoft Teams messages, a three-day calendar window borrowed from an unrelated case, because neither party gave the Court a workable formula of its own. The lesson: propose your own solution, or the court will import one from wherever it…
You Can’t Compel What You Didn’t Negotiate: Schulte v. LinkedIn and the Limits of AI Transparency in Discovery
A Northern District of California court just denied a bid to force disclosure of how LinkedIn used generative AI to review documents — the contested mirror image of last week’s stipulated AI protocol in James v. Cerebras. The lesson for litigators: the transparency you want from an opponent’s AI review is something you negotiate into…
Inside the First Stipulated AI Review Protocol: James v. Cerebras Systems
An analysis of the Northern District of California’s July 2026 stipulated ESI protocol and companion protective order — the first I’ve seen to govern generative AI as its own category of document review — and what it means for how you negotiate discovery in the age of AI. Reading time approximately 12 minutes.
Case: James…
Your Protective Order Wasn’t Written for ChatGPT
A Texas business court held that a company executive’s ChatGPT conversations about his own case are protected work product — then ordered him to identify every produced document he fed into the tool, including material covered by the protective order. It is the first state-court decision in this spring’s AI work-product line, and the first…
When Your Expert Uses AI: The First Federal Decision on Discoverability of Expert Prompts
A first-of-its-kind decision out of the District of Connecticut held that AI prompts used by an expert witness are discoverable methodology under Rule 26 — and the district court stayed the order sixteen days later. Every litigator working with experts who use AI needs to understand what the court said, what CLF is now arguing…
AI, Work Product, and the Protective Order Problem:What Morgan v. V2X, Inc. Means for Every Litigator
When a corporate defendant moved to restrict a pro se plaintiff’s AI use in discovery, the court didn’t just rule on the motion — it wrote the most comprehensive framework on AI and work product protection in federal court yet, and the protective order standard it set will follow every litigator using AI, not just…
Do You Waive Privilege by Using AI? Two Federal Courts Say It Depends
If you or your clients are using generative AI tools to analyze facts or draft litigation strategy, two new federal rulings show that privilege protection may turn on facts most litigators are not yet asking about.
By Kelly Twigger
In February 2026, two federal courts issued the first rulings addressing whether materials…