Posts Tagged ‘production’
hide story details [-]
- January 20th
-
Smile for the Discovery Production
In a dispute between a photographer and an educational textbook publisher, the Plaintiff sough the production of a definition list to the Defendants’ database abbreviations. Bean v. John Wiley & Sons, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4900, 1-3 (D. Ariz. Jan. 17, 2012). The Defendants’ sales, printing and distribution database was originally produced as screenshots and [...]
posted at 12:56pm on Jan 20th
- January 9th
-
In Search of the Industry Standard
Have you ever received a detailed project estimate from a service provider and wondered how they came up with it? I have. Unless you provided them your client specific data assumptions, they likely used “industry standards” to fill in the blanks. Hmmm. Where did these industry standards come from and how accurate are they?
posted at 10:30am on Jan 9th
- December 14th
-
So let’s get to the heart of this Predictive Coding – Technology Assisted Review thing
One recurring topic that keeps popping up was Predictive Coding, or Technology Assisted Review (we’ll use the defined term “PC-TAR” to avoid controversy from this point on). We know that using PC-TAR will help save money in the overall eDiscovery process. Albert Barsocchini recently did an article on “Ediscovery Production Without Review” last week and quoted an attorney at a major law firm that said they are producing documents without any reviewing any documents in a linear review process. This immediately raised the mental flag in my head as this was the first that I’ve heard of someone going straight to production using PC-TAR technology without first doing a human review of the responsive documents.
posted at 3:13pm on Dec 14th
- December 8th
-
Ediscovery Production Without Review
More law firms are producing electronically stored information without going through linear review. After potentially-relevant ESI has been collected and sent out for processing, the producing party is normally focused on boiling down the ocean of documents and identifying privileged documents for sequestering. Linear review of the identified subset has been the traditional last step and most expensive in the production cycle. Advanced analytics, judicial acceptance of computer aided coding, claw back/quick-peek agreements, and aggressive use of Rule 16 hearings have given attorneys a level of confidence that they can produce responsive ESI without spending time and money on a final linear review. An attorney at a major law firm recently said to me, “In many cases we just give them the documents without reviewing them. Usually after our interviews and privilege cull, we have a pretty good idea of what we have and don’t want to waste our client’s money on attorneys going through massive amounts of documents before production … and yes we do use a claw back agreement”. This cost saving production strategy will not work in every case; but should be a point of discussion in your electronic discovery planning.
posted at 3:54pm on Dec 8th
- December 2nd
-
Software Necessary to View Files Subject to Production under NY Freedom of Information Law
TJS of New York, Inc. v. New York State Dep’t of Taxation and Fin., 932 N.Y.S.2d 243 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 3, 2011)
In this case, the court determined that the software program necessary to view certain files produced to the petitioner subject to …posted at 11:07am on Dec 2nd
- November 4th
-
Recent Case Law Provides Guidance for ESI Production
Production of electronically stored information (ESI) is now an expected part of the discovery process, and it is important for counsel to be aware of the recent 1st Department decision in Tener v. Cremer[FOOTNOTE 1] which addressed a variety of issues…
posted at 8:13am on Nov 4th
- October 28th
-
When a Party Requests Native Files….
A Defendant/Producing Party resisted production of email in native file after making general objections to the production format. Linnebur v. United Tel. Ass’n, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124473, 20-21 (D. Kan. Oct. 27, 2011). The Producing Party claimed that producing the email messages printed as paper was “sufficient” for the requesting party to determine the [...]
posted at 3:44pm on Oct 28th
- October 19th
-
Producing Excel Spreadsheets as Tiffs
A Plaintiff produced Excel spreadsheets in TIFF format. As one could expect, the Defendant brought a motion to compel in native file format faster than you can sort a column in ascending order. Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. v. Seamaster Logistics, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117922 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 12, 2011). The Court quickly held [...]
posted at 12:54pm on Oct 19th
- September 8th
-
Rule 502(d) For Dummies With Judge Grimm
Listen to Karl Schieneman, Founder and Owner of Review Less and friend of JurInnov, talk with one of the most influential electronic discovery Judges the Honorable Paul Grimm Chief Magistrate Judge from the United States District Court, District of Maryland. Learn how Rule 502 helps lawyers cope with privilege waiver risks when dealing with [...]
posted at 1:28pm on Sep 8th
- August 17th
-
E-Discovery, Production and Non-Party Privacy
I presented at the Canadian Bar Association Legal Conference and Expo on Tuesday on “e-discovery, production and non-party privacy.” I started by stating that: the litigator’s role is to help the trier of fact uncover the truth; the litigator takes information and uses it as evidence to do so; and it is essential to the [...]
posted at 3:51pm on Aug 17th