Cooperation in Ediscovery: Counsel’s Database

In 1997, Judge D. Brooks Smith (W.D. PA) ordered the defendant in a class action to produce its counsel’s database of potentially responsive documents or suffer the consequences. One reason I sought that order was to cut through what would otherwise have been an untenably expensive process. Here are excerpts from the transcript, and the minute entry. Continue reading

Predictive Coding: Networks and Trees

Inside the BoxIn describing predictive coding systems, it’s important to distinguish document-based systems from corpus-based systems. Document-based systems make their predictions based on the similarity of each document to a single, previously-categorized document. Corpus-based systems are, in addition, able to use higher-order properties of groups of previously-categorized documents to make their predictions. Because of this advantage, corpus-based systems are less affected by errors in coding individual documents. Continue reading

Ediscovery: Information is Free

Infinity_hexagonal_axonometric_svg_sml, © Nevit Dilmen [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia CommonsOn August 3, 2015, ediscovery SAAS provider Logikcull unveiled the first all-inclusive, flat rate pricing plans in the ediscovery industry. I interviewed Logikcull’s CEO, Andy Wilson, about his company and its business model. What follows is an abridged version of that interview, vetted by Andy for accuracy. Continue reading

Social Document Review: Collaborative Annotation

connectionsWBG-200-CorGroup document reviews usually aren’t particularly ennobling. And in recent years we’ve learned that they can sometimes produce results that are worse than what we’d get from a well-trained machine.

That can change. We can use social technology to make group document reviews better, faster, and less costly, while making the reviewers’ work more professionally rewarding to them and more valuable to their employers. Continue reading

Competence in Ediscovery

Archery icon bcccindy casitoIn his latest blog post, ediscovery expert Craig Ball seeks input on a curriculum that would provide litigators with basic ediscovery competence.

In my comments to Craig’s post, I explain my view that most litigators don’t have the interest in information technology that, in my experience, is necessary (in addition to education) to allow them to attain basic ediscovery competence. In my view, litigators who aren’t interested in information technology should retain knowledgeable co-counsel who are. See Comment to Rule 1.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

Minds Matter: H5, Rules-Based TAR, and Cooperation

dipole_small copyThis article is about how H5‘s rules-based approach to technology-assisted review provides a great framework for illustrating cooperation in ediscovery. But first, some context.

By this time next year, Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will have been amended to codify the principles of proportionality and cooperation between opposing counsel. Continue reading