Our Insights on eDiscovery

CORRECTION: Announcing Thought Leader Interview with Jeffrey Brandt, Editor of Pinhawk Law Technology Daily Digest

April 20, 2011

As eDiscovery Daily has done in the past, we have periodically interviewed various thought leaders in eDiscovery and legal technology to provide insight as to trends in the industry for our readers to consider. Recently, I was able to interview Jeffrey Brandt, Editor of the Pinhawk Law Technology Daily Digest and columnist for Legal IT Professionals. I had stated that Jeff’s interview will be published this Friday, April 22, but forgot that this Friday is Good Friday (no blog post that day, sorry!). So, Jeff’s interview will be published next Monday, April 25 instead. Mark your calendars!

What eDiscovery Professionals Can Learn from the Internet Gambling Crack Down

April 19, 2011

Many of you may have heard about the FBI cracking down on the three largest online gambling sites in the past few days, as the owners of those sites in the United States have been indicted and charged with bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling offenses and the sites have been essentially shut down in the US. Restraining orders have been issued against more than 75 bank accounts in 14 countries used by the poker companies. Many US customers of these sites are now scrambling to try to get their funds out of the sites and finding it difficult to do so. So what? This is an eDiscovery blog, right? What does an Internet gambling crack down have to do with eDiscovery?

eDiscovery Trends: 2011 eDiscovery Errors Survey

April 18, 2011

As noted in Legal IT Professionals on Friday, LDM Global on Friday announced the results of its 2011 eDiscovery Errors survey. The company asked a selection of industry professionals their views on which errors they experienced most often during the discovery process. Results were collected from across the USA, Europe and Australia.

eDiscovery Trends: Sedona Conference Database Principles

April 15, 2011

Last month, The Sedona Conference® Working Group on Electronic Document Retention & Production (WG1) published the Public Comment Version of The Sedona Conference® Database Principles – Addressing the Preservation & Production of Databases &Database Information in Civil Litigation to provide guidance and recommendations to both requesting and producing parties to simplify discovery of databases and information derived from databases. You can download the publication here.

eDiscovery Case Law: Conclusion of Case Does Not Preclude Later Sanctions

April 14, 2011

In Green v. Blitz U.S.A., Inc., the defendant in a product liability action that had been settled over a year earlier was sanctioned for “blatant discovery abuses” prior to the settlement. Defendant was ordered to add $250,000 to its settlement with plaintiff, to provide a copy of the court’s order to every plaintiff in every lawsuit against defendant for the past two years or else forfeit an additional $500,000 “purging” sanction, and to include the order in its first responsive pleading in every lawsuit for the next five years in which defendant became involved.

Working Successfully with eDiscovery and Litigation Support Service Providers: Checking References – General Suggestions

April 13, 2011

Yesterday, we talked about the importance of checking references when considering eDiscovery and Litigation Support Service Providers. In the next blogs in this series, I’m going to suggest some questions you may consider asking when doing a reference check. First, however, let me make some general suggestions.

Working Successfully with eDiscovery and Litigation Support Service Providers: Is Checking References Important?

April 12, 2011

Over the years, I’ve been asked many times to serve as a reference for vendors with which I’ve worked. And, I’ve taken many reference-check phone calls. More often than not, those calls were less efficient and productive than they could have been — because they weren’t planned and good questions were not asked. In the next blogs in this series I’ll make some suggestions for doing an effective reference check.

eDiscovery Best Practices: Your ESI Collection May Be Larger Than You Think

April 11, 2011

Here’s a sample scenario: You identify custodians relevant to the case and collect files from each. Roughly 100 gigabytes (GB) of Microsoft Outlook email PST files and loose “efiles” is collected in total from the custodians. You identify a vendor to process the files to load into a review tool, so that you can perform first pass review and, eventually, linear review and produce the files to opposing counsel. After processing, the vendor sends you a bill – and they’ve charged you to process over 200 GB!! What happened?!?

eDiscovery Trends: Jurors and Social Media Don’t Mix

April 8, 2011

Discovery of social media is continuing to increase as a significant issue for organizations to address, with more and more cases addressing the topic, including this one and this one that have reached various conclusions regarding the discoverability of social media. However, when it comes to social media, courts agree on one thing: jurors and social media don’t mix. Courts have consistently rejected attempts by jurors to use social technology to research or to communicate about a case, and have increasingly provided pre-trial and post-closing jury instructions to jurors to dissuade them from engaging in this practice.

Working Successfully with eDiscovery and Litigation Support Service Providers: Dotting the I’s and Crossing the T’s

April 7, 2011

Yesterday, we talked about information to include in a Request for Proposal (RFP) to request eDiscovery and litigation support services. Before moving forward with a service provider for a project, there are a few due diligence steps you should take to protect yourself and your case-sensitive information.