Featured Electronic Discovery White papers
It is well-documented that e-discovery consumes increasing percentages of overall civil litigation costs. Judges and legal professionals are actively exploring a variety of initiatives to address the problem, and several recent conferences and legal rulings have taken up the theme of proportionality. Proportionality shifts attention from the general problem of high-volume, prohibitively expensive productions to a more focused analysis of whether discovery costs are proportionate to the value and the importance of the specific case in question. The American College of Trial Lawyers Task Force on Discovery has declared that "Proportionality should be the most important principle applied to all discovery."
The most important and immediate benefit of e-discovery project management is that it allows lawyers and their support staff to focus on what they do best – to focus on winning the case. This white paper explains what every attorney needs to know about e-discovery project management: What is project management? What do I look for when selecting an e-discovery project manager? What is my role as the sponsor of an e-discovery project? What should I expect my e-discovery project manager to do for me?
It is an increasingly difficult challenge to stay fully informed about emerging e-discovery law. Several years ago, tracking the handful of decisions that came down each month was manageable. Today, the number of decisions having some e-discovery implications has increased dramatically, reflecting the inescapable fact that the relevant information is generally stored electronically, regardless of the type or size of the case.
Litigation support professionals who manage electronic discovery projects experience high stakeholder expectations, complex requirements, difficult issue resolution and tight timelines. The process can quickly deteriorate to a state of chaos if not properly managed. The goal of this white paper is to introduce practical project management concepts and tools that can be easily leveraged with current litigation support expertise to increase project success.
ED101 - e-Discovery Fundamentals
In the last few years, courts have become more familiar with the underlying technology of email attachments. Arguments courts accepted only three years ago for mishandling attachments – vendor errors during collection or processing, mistakes with email archiving systems – will not hold water in many courts today. Other than document review, nothing in e-discovery is as costly or time-consuming as an order to re-produce a bad production. It is imperative for the producing and the requesting party to understand the court’s expectations for email attachment productions.
Emerging Trends
Healthcare organizations have been moving in the direction of increased digitization of information for some time, which has picked up considerable speed with monetary grants to expedite the transition to electronic health records in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009, also known as the “stimulus package.” Electronic health information will increasingly become the predominant form of evidence in regulatory proceedings and litigation related to healthcare. The potential vulnerability of electronic health information to breaches of privacy and security has become front-page news.
In-house corporate legal personnel responsible for managing litigation and governmental investigation are often asked questions about how they manage activities, particularly around electronic discovery. This white paper helps to illuminate issues related to legal holds, data management, vendor selection, e-discovery cost drivers, the amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, litigation readiness, technology and more.
Corporations are facing considerable changes where law and technology are concerned. There have been hints to the changes emerging for years. However, the forces causing this transformation have converged within recently and are necessitating a new way of thinking. Four factors are influencing these changes: The Amendments to the FRCP; The rapid growth of corporate data and networks; Technological innovations; Expanding capabilities and services offered by outside electronic discovery experts.
e-Discovery Readiness & Planning
Effectively managing legal holds requires the right combination of people, process and technology. It is how an organization protects itself when facing litigation and investigations. In the traditional paper world, the requirements for preserving relevant documents were straightforward. Organizations could not shred, burn or otherwise dispose of potentially relevant documents held in file cabinets, off-site storage warehouses or in the desks of employees. In today's digital world, carefully and defensibly preserving electronically stored information (ESI) is much more complex—and risky.
This paper outlines how taking a proactive, organized approach to discovery response planning can help enterprises predictably reduce the cost, time and risk inherent in the electronic discovery process; apply proven methodologies for developing and implementing comprehensive response plans; and leverage the planning process as a way to improve the interdependencies between the people, processes and technology required for defensible discovery response.
Inexpensive storage technology, expanding networks, the explosion of data, new data formats, and stricter regulations and tighter timeframes are putting organizations at risk when they are required to respond to electronic discovery requests.
Case Law / Rules
The recent surge in sanctions relating to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 26(g) certification requirement
increases the risk to corporate clients and outside counsel when discovery is mishandled. Engaging a qualified
e-discovery expert early in the discovery process can help create transparency, demonstrating impartiality and good
faith. This white paper discusses the rise of FRCP 26(g), the courts' rulings and increased scrutiny of the e-discovery
process and how many mistakes can be avoided or mitigated.
After more than five years of discussion and public comment, new amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) took effect on December 1, 2006. New language in six Federal Rules—rules 16, 26, 33, 34, 37 and 45—requires attorneys to pay specific attention to electronic discovery issues—or, in the vocabulary of the new rules, "discovery of electronically stored information (ESI)." The exact language of these amended rules has been widely broadcast through lectures, articles and outreach efforts by the Federal Judicial Committee itself, but the precise practical impact of these rules are just beginning to be tested as judges are already beginning to apply these new standards. Even without a history of opinions and orders, the plain language of the amended rules suggests that a number of common discovery practices and strategies need to be reviewed and updated in light of the new standards.
e-Discovery Standards & Best Practices
Gigabyte for gigabyte, e-discovery in small matters often costs proportionately more than in large cases. New tools and techniques can help cut e-discovery costs in small matters, allowing cases to resolve based on merits instead of budget constraints.
It is no secret that the majority of the cost of discovery resides in the cost of the review. Often, more than 80% of total electronic discovery costs can land here. It is exactly that metric that leads to the existence of e-discovery providers, such as Fios, who have the experience and capacity to ingest large (as in huge) amounts of raw data, disassemble that data to its lowest common level and then systematically and defensibly separate the chaff from the “potentially responsive.” This white paper addresses the growing acceptance, requirement and benefits of concept search technologies for e-discovery review.
As the prevalence of sound recordings in today’s enterprises grows, new requirements for legal and regulatory compliance are accelerating the need to manage these recordings as business records. This paper outlines a new framework for managing the discovery process, specifically when audio recordings are requested.