#E-Discovery: Don't Be Afraid to Be Smart—Select While You Collect

Start with specification of issues and desired information—in English, not keywords.

Joel Henry, Law Technology News

January 4, 2015    | 0 Comments

Franck Boston

Editor's Note: This article was chosen in the second annual blind competition by the Arizona State University-Arkfeld E-Discovery and Digital Evidence Conference. Joel Henry also was selected in 2014, for "Predictive Coding is So Yesterday." The three 2015 winners have been invited to present their papers during the conference, March 11-13  at ASU's Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, in Tempe, Ariz. (Monica Bay, LTN's editor-in-chief, will be speaking at the conference.)
 

Preservation requires parties to ensure that electronically stored information "is protected against inappropriate alteration or destruction," states the Electronic Discovery Reference Model. Collection, on the other hand, entails “gathering ESI for further use in the e-discovery process," EDRM continues. Collection is something that many teams simply equate with preservation—if ESI is preserved, then it is collected and is fed into the review process. This mistake results in inflated ESI review costs. 

The Rand Institute for Civil Justice's 2012 report, “Where the Money Goes: Undertanding Litigant Expenditures for Producing Electronic Discovery,” found that just 8 percent of the total cost of producing electronic items stems from collection. The report also acknowledges the respondents admitted to not tracking these costs in any systematic way. Perhaps this results from IT departments failing to track hours, or maybe the difficulty of assessing hourly costs and processing overhead. No matter the cause for this lack of public data, collection of rapidly increasing amounts of electronic information—stored in multiple locations, for multiple custodians, relating to multiple issues—is expensive to collect and even more expensive to review. Without a smart collection process, culling of the data set relies on the old and error-prone keyword selection process.

Read more: http://www.lawtechnologynews.com/id=1202713747890/EDiscovery-Dont-Be-Afraid-to-Be-SmartmdashSelect-While-You-Collect#ixzz3NxhhhBn6

Three E-Discovery Trends Spurred by Proposed FRCP Amendments

Vendor Voice: The big winners will be information governance managers and e-discovery consultants.

Helen Geib , Law Technology News

December 29, 2014    | 0 Comments

It is widely expected that the proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be approved and become effective as scheduled in December 2015. A number of the amendments will have an impact on electronic data discovery.

The common theme of these changes is a threefold emphasis on 1) knowing the client’s electronically stored information; 2) knowing it early in the case; and 3) understanding EDD technology options for data handling. Rather than representing a radical break with current best practices, the amendments provide new impetus to three existing trends.

The most significant EDD-related changes are to FRCP Rules 16, 26, 34, and 37:

• Rule 16 scheduling order on preservation: The Rule 16 order may cover preservation in addition to discovery of ESI.

• Rule 26 proportionality standard: A new proportionality standard for discovery is introduced in Rule 26. Factors include access to the information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery, and whether the burden or expense outweighs its likely benefits.

Read more: http://www.lawtechnologynews.com/id=1202713586370/Three-EDiscovery-Trends-Spurred-by-Proposed-FRCP-Amendments#ixzz3NmXlZnwR

Proposed Amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Governing Discovery and Preservation of Electronically Stored Information One Step Closer to Approval

Preparing for the Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules Of

LexisNexis Litigation Solutions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxZ39E2Bw0s&feature=youtu.be