Discovery rules exist to prevent surprise tactics and evidence hiding.

Evidence

In the legal profession, destroying or suppressing evidence ranks just below stealing money from a client. The very purpose of discovery, wrote Justice William O. Douglas in 1958, “is to make trial less a game of blindman’s buff and more a fair contest, with the basic issues and facts disclosed to the fullest practicable extent.” — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2903 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Economists may find the situation reminiscent of two producers who both allocate their limited productive resources between two commodities. One commodity, “security against false alarm,” involves external economies; the other, “security against surprise,” involves external diseconomies. — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 827 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Discovery in complex cases can generate tens of millions of documents.; Legal discovery rules exist to prevent trials from being contests of concealment — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2903; Security against false alarm and against surprise have opposite externalities — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 827

Broader Connections

• Legal discovery rules exist to prevent trials from being contests of concealment #corroborates (0.95) — Jonathan Harr, A Civil Action, 2903
• Security against false alarm and against surprise have opposite externalities #expands (0.72) — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 827