E-Discovery

Limiting excessive electronic discovery demands will reduce litigation costs and burdens on businesses.

The Problem

The rise of electronic data has led to excessive discovery demands, driving up litigation costs and creating undue burdens on businesses defending lawsuits. These demands often are used as leverage to force settlements.

ATRA’s Position

Implement clear rules limiting the scope of e-discovery, focusing on relevance and proportionality to streamline litigation.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around E-Discovery

No related legislation or reform items found for this issue.



E-Discovery News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around E-Discovery

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around E-Discovery
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Massachusetts v. Universal Health
(U.S. Supreme Court, filed January 26, 2016): Arguing that false certification claims should not be subject to the False Claims Act and that the Supre...
Massachusetts
  • Court Remanded Case Back to Lower Court iconCourt Remanded Case Back to Lower Court
Patchett v. Lee
(Ind., filed February 19, 2016): Arguing that admissibility of “phantom damages” as evidence impedes the search for the truth and unnecess...
Indiana
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Exxon Mobil v. New Hampshire
(U.S. Supreme Court, filed February 22, 2016): Arguing that Exxon’s liability for selling MTBE-Oxygenated gasoline should be preempted by the federal ...
New Hampshire
  • Court Denied Cert iconCourt Denied Cert
Konstantin v. 630 Third Avenue Associates, et. al.
(New York, filed in February of 2016): Arguing that consolidation of asbestos-based personal injury actions for trial violates CPLR 602(a) where the a...
New York
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
Certainteed Corporation v. Fletcher
(Ga., filed in March of 2016): Arguing that manufacturers should not be held liable for negligence in asbestos cases involving take-home exposure. ...
Georgia
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Microsoft v. Baker
(U.S., filed March 18, 2016): Arguing that a federal court of appeals lacks jurisdiction to review an order denying class certification after the plai...
SCOTUS
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
In Re Lipitor
(3rd Cir., filed March 28, 2016): Arguing that antitrust cases require pleadings to include sufficient facts to establish a plausible foundation for t...
3rd Circuit
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
In Re Trinity Industries Inc.
(5th Cir., filed March 28, 2016): Arguing that if allowed to stand, the decision below would produce deep regulatory uncertainty for manufacturers and...
5th Circuit
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Lindenberg v. Jackson National Life Insurance Co.
(Tenn., filed April 15, 2016): Arguing that Tennessee’s statutory limit on punitive damages is constitutional.  The statutory limit does not infringe ...
Tennessee
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Graham v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
(11th Cir., filed April 22, 2016).  Arguing that reliance on general, non-specific verdicts to foreclose litigation of highly specific issues that may...
11th Circuit
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.