Remove Court Rules Remove Evidence Remove Healthcare
article thumbnail

How Not to Negotiate an ESI Protocol? Say it is “Mandatory”; and, Demand That Discussions be Recorded

E-Discovery LLC

Pyramid Healthcare, Inc., 20, 2025), the court wrote: From the inception of this action, Counsel for the parties could not agree on the scope and methodology for ESI discovery. In Wilbert v. 2025 WL 873947 (W.D.

article thumbnail

Laws Banning Trans Students from School Sports Will Soon Be Before Supreme Court

Practice of Law

After a federal district court ruled for the state of West Virginia, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed , ruling that the law cannot be lawfully applied to Becky. SCOTUS Soon to Settle Things Unsurprisingly, both Idaho and West Virginia appealed the circuit courtsrulings to the U.S. Stay tuned.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Admissibility of Internet Searches About Terminating Pregnancy

E-Discovery LLC

While there were many issues on appeal, one was whether evidence of her internet searches related to termination of a pregnancy was properly admitted on the facts presented. The decision to admit that evidence was affirmed by the intermediate appellate court. See Case No. The facts were awful. Akers was pregnant. On appeal, Ms.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Upholds State Bans on Gender-Affirming Care for Minors

Practice of Law

There has been an increasingly heated debate across the nation over the right to access transgender healthcare, particularly for children. Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision upholding a Tennessee law that bans certain medical treatments for transgender minors. It all culminated this past Wednesday, when the U.S.

article thumbnail

Multiple States Rebuked for Denying Transgender Health Care

Practice of Law

Other states have attempted to block or restrict treatments for trans patients with legislation, only to find those measures invalidated by courts. Clayton County , when the Supreme Court ruled that employers could not discriminate against employees on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.