Litigation expenses are a significant concern for most organizations. Data analytics, when properly utilized, can provide substantial cost reduction, while also reducing organizational risk.
Analytics in eDiscovery can help produce efficiency in a document review and locate key documents more quickly, resulting in key informed decision making related to case strategy earlier in the case.
Cross-border discovery in multinational investigations and litigation is a complex and seeming unnavigable field rife with challenges. In fact, what is referred to as discovery in the United States does not exist in most other jurisdictions. Where it does exist, it is not only referred to differently, but is also much more limited in scope. These differences have resulted in tension between legal systems. Other conflicts arise from the different cultural understandings of privacy.
Change is the only constant thing in electronic discovery (eDiscovery) industry. Driving this change is the technology. The common misconception of the advancement in eDiscovery is that technology’s new efficiency correspondingly then result in it being cheaper to develop as well. The problem with this belief is that not all processes or applications are created with the same complexities and sophistication. If prescribed programming and design methodologies are followed, the technology is expensive to develop.
Processing electronically stored information (ESI) for discovery is a multifaceted challenge. There is no universally agreed upon path from the beginning of the process to the end. Every project requires a new variation to that approach. The proprietary processing system Knovos has developed consists of more than forty modules, each designed to perform a specific function and to link seamlessly with other modules. The workflow can be customized to accommodate the unique requirements of each client and each case.
Managing a reduction effort is fraught with potential exposure to spoliation liability; partly because of the inherent difficulty of the task, but even more due to the challenges posed by adversaries attempting to take full advantage of any misstep. The effort requires a cautious application of the corporate risk management function. To be fully defensible, a procedure for the reduction of legacy data must be transparent, secure and in conformity with prevailing decisions law and best practices.
At the time of this writing, each of the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU) implement data protection rules in their own unique way; however, a recent proposition by the European Commission (E.C.) could soon change implementation rules of data protection in the EU. On March 15, 2012, the E.C. proposed a comprehensive reform to the 1995 EU Data Protection Rules that included a plan to do away with divergent investigation and enforcement practices.
Recent studies show how people try to convince their ideological opposites that there is a very good reason why conservatives and liberals quite often seem to be talking past each other, and despite a great deal of earnest public debate, relatively few people are effective in persuading their ideological opposites to change their views. At times, it even appears that debating with each other backfires and results in both sides hardening their opposing views. The lesson for trial lawyers is that they should be more effective advocates and should keep in mind that the target audience (the jury, the judge, etc.) may have very different values.
As the recent advancements in Technology Assisted Review (TAR) and analytics tools reduce eDiscovery cost – keyword searching remains the core solution for collection, review, and deposition preparations. The attorneys can leverage an opportunity to test the performance of search term syntax using documents from a preserved discovery collection. Keyword searching facilitates opposing counsels to negotiate explicit, system neutral, controlled parameters for electronically stored information (ESI) in discovery.