How eDiscovery Became a Legal Battleground
The adversarial nature of the U.S. legal system is rooted in the belief that truth is best revealed through the presentation of fair, evidence-based confrontation by opposing parties. For this model to function effectively, there must be a fair and open exchange of evidence.
In the digital age, however, this ideal is under siege. All too often, litigators are weaponizing eDiscovery — leveraging the complexity, volume, and cost of electronic evidence — not to uncover the truth, but to overwhelm, exhaust, and divert attention from the substantive issues of the case to the procedural burdens of evidence exchange.
This is the emerging frontline of U.S. jurisprudence, with more than 5,000 annual eDiscovery related court rulings since 2021.1 2 And for many legal teams, this is a battleground on which they weren’t trained to fight.
The Weaponization of eDiscovery
At its core, weaponizing eDiscovery involves exploiting the discovery process. This isn’t about the pursuit of truth — it’s about strategic attrition.
As businesses depend more on diverse digital platforms for communication and data storage, the volume and complexity of electronically stored information (ESI) continues to grow exponentially.3 This provides ample opportunities for eDiscovery vulnerabilities and abuse. Today’s discovery process doesn’t just involve emails and PDFs; it includes text messages, chat logs, cloud storage, collaboration tools, and structured databases. What was once a manageable exchange of paper documents is now a labyrinth of servers, custodians, formats, and metadata that respondents must learn to navigate.
Why Is This Happening?
There are four main reasons the weaponization of eDiscovery is on the rise:
- The Evidence Pool Keeps Growing. Digital information is expanding at a staggering pace. A single corporate custodian can generate millions of documents, messages, and records.
- eDiscovery is Expensive. Discovery often makes up the bulk of litigation costs in cases that don’t settle. The skyrocketing expense of review, processing, and production of ESI can be financially devastating to smaller companies.
- Complexity is Increasing. New platforms and file types emerge constantly. Legal teams are expected to manage everything from mobile phone data to structured databases. The rapid pace of technological change guarantees that discovery will only become increasingly more complex.
- It’s About the Money. eDiscovery has become a $16billion industry 4 that is hungry for business. And this figure doesn’t even include eDiscovery-related legal fees generated by merits counsel or traditional eDiscovery services that have been brought in-house by larger firms. With that kind of money on the table, incentives abound to prolong, complicate, or exploit the process.
The Four Tactics of eDiscovery Abuse
The weaponization of eDiscovery typically manifests in four ways. Here are the Four D’s of digital discovery warfare:
- Dogfights. Highly adversarial discovery disputes where procedural battles eclipse substantive issues. Parties engage in endless objections, sanctions, threats, and motion practice — not to clarify facts, but to engage in a siege that bleeds the opposition dry.
- Document Dumps. Dumping massive volumes of irrelevant or marginally relevant documents on an opponent in an unstructured way. The goal? Obscure the truth, overwhelm the opposition, and make it impossible to find the key evidence buried in the noise.
- Discovery on Discovery. When disputes spiral into meta-litigation — arguments not about the facts of the case, but about how each side is handling the discovery process. Accusations of withholding, spoliation, or insufficient preservation can bog down a case for months, even years.
- Dodgeball. A playbook of obstructionist tactics: deny, delay, divert, and drain the opponent’s resources. It’s less about compliance, more about confusion.
Where Abuse Happens Most
The battlefield isn’t the same in every case. Some scenarios are especially prone to eDiscovery abuse:
-
- Asymmetrical Litigation. When one party has minimal ESI data and the other terabytes, the smaller side can weaponize discovery requests to overwhelm the other, often without consequences. The inverse is also true: a party with extensive resources can flood a less-equipped opponent with data (see Document Dumps, above), knowing they lack the bandwidth to sort through it all.
-
- Bad Facts or Weak Legal Arguments. A party with a shaky case on the merits may pursue aggressive, discovery-driven motion practice to make it too costly to continue or to pressure the other side into settling.
-
- Distrust Between Parties. When trust breaks down, discovery can become a hellscape. The result? A loop of endless motions, accusations, judicial intervention, and time consuming “discovery on discovery.” As Hon. Ralph Artigliere (Ret.) explains, “Too often, settlements falter not on the merits, but because adversarial eDiscovery practices strain relationships and erode credibility.”5
-
- Unequal Legal Sophistication. There’s a growing chasm between the “haves” and “have-nots” in litigation. On one side, you have Big Law firms and national eDiscovery boutique firms with dedicated discovery attorneys, in-firm reviewers, data scientists, and litigation support specialists to handle ESI matters. On the other side, smaller firms may have one paralegal with some eDiscovery experience, if that. The imbalance in expertise and resources creates an opening for exploitation and the inability of the “have-nots” to withstand an eDiscovery onslaught.
Prepare to fortify your defenses for the eDiscovery battlefield. In Part 2 of this blog, we will discuss how to fight back against the weaponization of eDiscovery. Stay tuned!
_________________________
1 https://minerva26.com/ediscovery-assistant-releases-2024-ediscovery-case-law-year-in-review-report/
4 Ibid.
5 https://edrm.net/2024/12/keeping-the-temperature-just-right-for-effective-ediscovery-negotiations/