The Trial Evidence Committee, which monitors developments in the law of evidence, is comprised of more than 1,300 individuals. The Committee produces a quarterly newsletter which typically includes articles on various evidence issues, surveys of national and regional developments in the law of evidence, and updates on significant state and federal evidence cases. Throughout the year, the Committee sponsors and/or co-sponsors programs at national and regional ABA meetings. Members review a wide variety of evidentiary issues and may work on various subcommittees and publications which deal with issues such as expert witnesses, highly technical evidence, electronic evidence, legislation, ethics, privileges, and other issues raised under the Federal Rules of Evidence and their state counterparts.

If you are a trial attorney, especially a new or young trial attorney, the Trial Evidence Committee of the ABA Section of Litigation can offer tremendous benefits to you. The Trial Evidence Committee addresses fundamental as well as cutting edge evidentiary issues that affect each of us in our practice, and it offers valuable tools for us as trial attorneys. Membership in the Trial Evidence Committee is free with your membership in the Section of Litigation.

Under Fed. R. Evid. 502(b), the Northern District of Illinois has held that a post-production review for mistakenly produced documents is not necessary in every case, rejected a bright-line rule that would deem the use of paralegals or non-lawyers for document review unreasonable, and determined that it should consider the parties’ actions after learning that a document had been inadvertently produced to determine whether or not a party took reasonable steps to rectify inadvertent production pursuant to subpart (b)(3) of the rule.

Under Fed. R. Evid. 502(b), the Northern District of Illinois has held that a post-production review for mistakenly produced documents is not necessary in every case, rejected a bright-line rule that would deem the use of paralegals or non-lawyers for document review unreasonable, and determined that it should consider the parties’ actions after learning that a document had been inadvertently produced to determine whether or not a party took reasonable steps to rectify inadvertent production pursuant to subpart (b)(3) of the rule.

Are you looking for a multi-state resource on Daubert issues? Look no further, as the Trial Evidence Committee will unveil its 50 State Survey of Daubert/Frye Applicability on this site in the next few weeks. This survey summarizes each state’s standard with respect to the admissibility of expert testimony and identifies the standard pursuant to which such testimony is received. Please note that you must be a section and committee member to access this valuable information, so join the Trial Evidence Committee now to take advantage of this wonderful resource as soon as it becomes available.

The Standing Rules Committee has recommended that the Judicial Conference accept and the Supreme Court adopt changes to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) and to Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(3). These proposed changes will be considered this fall by the Judicial Conference and could be adopted by the Supreme Court by the end of 2009. Stay tuned for further developments.