Blog

This eDiscovery key terms list is the first step in understanding our tool. Our key terms are sequenced to highlight the timing in which each process will arise in your workflow.

According to Rule 34 of the FRCP, a party in litigation may serve on any other party a request for production of relevant documents. This request must specify with reasonable particularity each item or category of new items to be inspected. The request may also specify the form in which ESI is to be produced. Although not technically required in the Federal Rules, the form of production is a crucial negotiating point to ensure that production load file and data from the opposing party can be processed and utilized effectively in your firm's eDiscovery tool. We often see "bad" data come in from the opposing party or a third party. If this occurs, you may need to pay for service hours of consultants and experts to fix the load files or identify the specific documents that are causing problems. In order to help you get ahead on potential issues with opposing party data, this blog provides a sample request which defines the form of production. Aside from this, you will also need to keep in mind other requirements in rule 34 and rule 26 which describe your requirements to discuss issues relating to: specificity, the eDiscovery process, timing, logistics regarding how the production will be delivered and how it can be accessed. Most importantly, we recommend working closely with the opposing party to identify these issues as early as possible. If you have any specific questions, consult your eDiscovery vendor (or leave us a message)!

For many years, litigators have relied on the probative value of document metadata to define gross relevancy, pinpoint the who what and when of essential facts and shape ESI request before during and after 26(f) conferences. More recently, our legal community has employed artificial intelligence to analyze document metadata and complex word associations (word vectors) and predict what is important and relevant to the resolution of our clients' disputes. It doesn’t matter what you call our new document and metadata analysis tools; Artificial intelligence (AI), Predictive coding or TAR 2.0, the results are clear. New technologies allow litigators to deliver more effective, efficient and inexpensive dispute resolution. Document metadata and AI has moved us 1 step closer to the prime directive of civil procedure, Rule #1, Just, Speedy and Inexpensive client services.

Digital WarRoom is an eDiscovery software platform that provides the capability for law firms and legal departments to perform robust document review. Once you preserve and collect all the data that could be potentially relevant to your investigation, you should process it into an eDiscovery tool. This will involve extracting all possible metadata as well as indexing the words in your files. Once all your data is processed, the main role of eDiscovery software is to help you cull the data and make a range of decisions on each document. We call this your “attorney work product”. As you mark documents, add descriptions and create privilege logs, you are creating metadata which will now be associated with each document.

What is deduping? De-duplication is the removal of duplicate documents from your data set. Deduping in and of itself is an easy decision – do I want to review five documents or one? In most cases deduping can prevent reviewers from reviewing the same document many times. Many of our clients don’t want to be overwhelmed by the number of documents that they have.

What Is Early Case Assessment? Early case Assessment (ECA) is an initial, general analysis of custodians and their data for the purpose of narrowing and defining scope. This practice can be repeated and will occur at multiple points in the EDRM. Throughout the ECA process, you will gain an understanding of document quantity to inform cost expectations, and document quality to inform how you will negotiate the scope of the investigation and the definition of gross relevance. This will be one of several important topics to be discussed at your ongoing 26(f) conference of the parties. How you proceed should tie in closely with your case strategy, budget expectations, and overall risk assessment.

What should you consider directly after processing? In order to become self sufficient in eDiscovery, you will have to accept the following facts. 1) Regardless of eDiscovery platform, not all documents can be opened. 2) Regardless of eDiscovery platform, not all documents can be indexed

What is eDiscovery Processing? eDiscovery processing refers to the catalog, extraction, and organization of data from a collection of files. This step is foundational to help you comply with eDiscovery obligations in a reasonable time frame. Most notably - the following actions will take place.

eDiscovery software has traditionally been viewed as a tool for large cases and federal forums. However, firms of all sizes must now manage electronic discovery cost-effectively. This challenge, often referred to as "The Small Case Dilemma," highlights the need for practical solutions tailored to smaller cases. This article explores how to address these unique challenges and manage eDiscovery costs efficiently for small firms.