eDJ Contributor: Lynn Frances

Lynn Frances
Lynn Frances has been writing about electronic discovery since 1999, when she began writing for DolphinSearch, one of the early concept search technology developers. Over the years, Lynn has produced a wide variety of marketing, technical and educational materials for eDiscovery service providers and professional organizations. She has also contributed to the design and usability of several eDiscovery review platforms and has developed online courses in electronic discovery.

Ms. Frances founded eDiscovery Writer in 2008, so that she could offer her expertise to a wider range of clientele. Today, she works with a team of eDiscovery professionals to support the marketing and educational initiatives of companies across the industry. Lynn holds a Masters Degree in Education with a specialty in online education. Contact her at lynn@eDiscovery-Writer.com.


Posts by Lynn Frances



show story details [+]hide story details [-]
  • A Few Points from the Executive Counsel Institute Conference in San Francisco

    I am here at the Executive Counsel Institute event in San Francisco along with a excellent mix of corporate, law firm, and provider attendees.  The program is interesting right from the beginning and I will try to provide coverage throughout the event. Right out of the gate, David Kessler of Fulbright & Jaworski started discussing the important 2012 cases related to eDiscovery: Pippins v KPMG; Voom v EchoStar; DaSilva Moore v Publicis Group & MSL Group . The participants are already engaged and it should be an interesting couple of days. The group discussed cloud computing and its implications for eDiscovery. An important point was brought up: Most cloud computing contracts do not have a provision for eDiscovery. If you decide to negotiate a contract, you will probably be defining the terms. Know what you want. Regarding social media, they [...]



  • Is Keyword Search an Ethical Option?

    Predictive Coding, or Technology Assisted Review (TAR) was the subject of five sessions at LegalTech. Even when it wasn’t the focus of a session, it was often mentioned. Why? Probably because so many of the eDiscovery experts have been busy reminding us of how ineffective our traditional means of identifying relevant documents actually are. As far back as 1985, the Blair & Maron study found that, though reviewers believed that their keywords had identified 75% of the relevant documents, in reality, they had uncovered only 20%.  In the more recent 2009 Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) study, keyword searches were even less effective: finding only 9% of the relevant documents. In contrast, the TREC study found that predictive coding techniques, techniques that transmit the decision criteria of expert reviewers across the data set, had an average recall rate of 41%. The [...]