Appointment of special masters a matter of timing

A sampling of the timing of special master appointments and their assigned duties

Recently, a Pittsburgh federal judge denied an antitrust plaintiff's request to appoint a special master to examine the reasonableness of the e-discovery charges of the prevailing defendant. The judge said "some exceptional condition" was not present, as Rule 53(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires for such appointments. The judge also found that special masters may only be appointed at the beginning of the discovery process. The attached chart illustrates disparities in the timing of special master appointments and the e-discovery functions they carry out.