Why Lawyers Can't Ignore eDiscovery
The AI Trust Test in eDiscovery
eDiscovery Tips: Helpful Questions to Ask Your Clients
30-Minute Workshop: Resume Clinic for EDiscovery Project Managers
eDiscovery for the Rest of Us: Why Small Firm eDiscovery Matters
Sitting with the C-Suite: Trial Teams – Narrowing Data through Centric Search
Search engines based on Generative AI, known as Generative Search Engines (“GSE”), provide actual answers to user queries, not just website links. These links suggest dozens, hundreds, if not thousands of websites where...more
Preparing a talk about keyword search, I set out to distill observations gleaned from a host of misbegotten keyword search efforts, many from the vantage point of the court’s neutral expert née Special Master assigned to...more
In civil litigation or regulatory inquiries, parties often must engage in electronic discovery, also known as eDiscovery, which is the process of identifying, preserving, collecting, reviewing, and producing electronically...more
Since Judge Andrew Peck’s ruling over nine years ago in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe & MSL Group, the use of Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) for managing review in eDiscovery has been court approved. Yet many lawyers...more
Looking beyond the keyword list paradigm as AI and analytics take the stage - In a 2012 True North blog post, one of our H5 experts provided some practical advice on reducing privilege review burdens and costs by...more
It is well established that courts will support parties electing to use technology assisted review (TAR) to identify responsive documents in discovery. However, TAR methodologies and quality control (QC) measures are still...more
The main problem with discovery is the cost. In a very small number of truly bet-the-company cases (for example, where the CEO’s emails must be produced) the greater risk can be failing to do discovery perfectly. But 99 times...more