Posts Tagged ‘discovery_practice’
hide story details [-]
- May 8th
-
Are You an E-Discovery Super Nerd?
Do you know what this formula means? Do you know how to use it to make your productions more defensible? Your quality control efforts more efficient? If so, congradulations, you are a super-nerd! If not, well, you’re just a nerd. Check out my first attempt at blogging about math and statistics and up your game to super-nerdom status. I’m 95% confident that 50% of you will be glad you did, plus of minus an error ratio of 10%. Already a super-nerd? Or at least think you are? Try the math out and test your skills. Then leave a comment. Craig Ball already did, and it caused me to make a minor change to my predictions concerning this formula. Maybe your comments will have an impact too.
posted at 5:06pm on May 8th
-
Are You Ready for the Next Step in Document Review Technology?
Adding to this week’s Da Silva’s appeal affirmation is the Circuit Court of Loudoun County, Virginia’s support of the use of predictive coding as a culling method for document review. In Global Aerospace, Inc. v. Landow Aviation, L.P., No. CL 61040 (Vir. Cir. Ct. Apr. 23, 2012), the Court approved the Defendant’s use of predictive coding to cull the asserted 250 gigabytes of reviewable data (about 2 million documents) for review and production. The court approved predictive coding over the objection of opposing counsel, a distinction between Landow and Judge Peck’s decision in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, 2012 …
[ CONTINUE READING → ]
posted at 2:01pm on May 8th
- May 7th
-
A Critique of the Delaware District Court’s Revised Default eDiscovery Standard
As many of you are likely aware, the Delaware District Court revised its Default Standard for Discovery back in December. Several sources walked readers through the new provisions and speculated about the practical impacts of the new Default Standard. …
posted at 3:53pm on May 7th
-
Predictive Coding Endorsed by the Southern District of New York – People plus technology equals smart search
Predictive Coding Endorsed by the Southern District of New York – People plus technology equals smart search "Attorneys should not agree to the use of predictive coding or other search…
posted at 4:22am on May 7th
-
How electronic discovery during litigation is impacted by information stored in the cloud
How electronic discovery during litigation is impacted by information stored in the cloud "Cloud computing is the marketing focus of many IT companies. Ads touting the benefits of cloud computing…
posted at 3:16am on May 7th
- May 3rd
-
Does Predictive Coding Spell Doom for Entry-Level Associates?
Erika C. Birg, partner, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough: When I was a junior associate, the partner for whom I worked made clear that while I may dislike document review, it provided job security because I knew the documents. The same is true to…
posted at 1:05pm on May 3rd
-
Judge rejects entire defense after spoliation
Virginia Lawyers Weekly published this article today . Goes to show that honesty and integrity an inttegral part off our justice system. In this lawsuit involving Safeway, Inc., (Garlick v. Safeway, Inc.), and the Virginia Supreme Cou…
posted at 11:54am on May 3rd
-
The Real Winners In Technology-Assisted Review Are…
It’s time to make a call: the biggest winner in Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) will be…wait for it…expert witnesses. For those of you not familiar with the role of an expert witness, according to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, “A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and(d) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.” When TAR is involved, such an expert must understand software, review processes and approaches, and advanced statistics – a tall order that will likely lead to hourly rates of over $1,000 for those willing to appear in court and show off their knowledge.
posted at 9:00am on May 3rd
- May 2nd
-
Take Two: Reactions to ‘Da Silva Moore’ Predictive Coding Order
E-discovery experts sound notes of enthusiasm and caution over Judge Carter’s ruling. There’s no shortage of opinions in response to court orders regarding the predictive coding aspects of the da Silva Moore labor law case. In Monique da Silva Moore, e…
posted at 9:17pm on May 2nd
-
Metadata Meets Facebook E-Discovery
The recent trial court decision in Hinshaw & Culbertson v. E-Smart Technologies,[FOOTNOTE 1] serves as notice that electronically stored information already produced, albeit in electronic form, may be required to be reproduced if the ESI did not co…
posted at 9:09pm on May 2nd