Notable Articles in E-Discovery 1/30/13

Delaware ruling gives judicial push to predictive coding technology (Michael Kozubek, InsideCounsel)

With e-discovery costs still skyrocketing, both judges and litigants have sought ways to reduce expense. Some have turned to predictive coding, an advanced form of technology- or computer-assisted review (TAR or CAR), which is gaining acceptance in the courts...“This is a wake-up call that in-house counsel and their outside firms should understand the pros and cons of predictive coding now, rather than scrambling to understand the technology for the first time during an active case,” says Matthew Nelson, e-discovery counsel in the intelligent information group at security software company Symantec."

Global Aerospace predictive coding results approved by judge (Chris Dale, The d-Disclosure Information Project)

"Step-by-step, predictive coding is gaining the acceptance in US litigation which was anticipated for it during last year. The latest advance is that the judge in Global Aerospace Inc. et al., v. Landow Aviation, L.P. dba Dulles Jet Center, et al who approved the defendant’s use of predictive coding has now gone on to approve its results. In a jurisdiction which is driven to the point of obsession by precedent in the broadest sense of that word, almost to the exclusion of first principles, this matters very much."

Is predictive coding better than lawyers at document review? (Debra Cassens Weiss, ABAJournal)

"... the chances of an undiscovered document may be greater if humans do the document review, according to a 2011 article in the Richmond Journal of Law and Technology. It noted research showing predictive coding finds about 77 percent of relevant documents on average, while humans find only about 60 percent."

TAR INCREASES EFFICIENCIES, DRIVES COST SAVINGS (Eric Robinson, The Ediscovery Blog)

"Technology-assisted review is, without a doubt, here to stay. If 2012 was the year that the legal community finally lifted the veil on TAR and acknowledged it, then 2013 seems poised to be the year in which it is fullyaccepted and adopted by the legal community. Those who cling to the myths associated with TAR are in danger of violating duties to their clients, and potentially wasting significant time and money. In nearly every matter, TAR most certainly deserves a look, and you might even like what you find. "

Notable Articles in E-Discovery 1/23/13

“Act Reasonably” — Two Court-Issued Checklists Outlining Defensible, Targeted ESI Collection (John Patzakis)

"Recently two separate and prominent courts — the federal court for the Northern District of California and the Delaware Court of Chancery (which is the primary court of equity for Delaware registered corporations) issued eDiscovery preservation guidelines. This is not unprecedented as other courts have issued similar written guidance in the form of general guidance or even more enforceable local rules of court specifically addressing eDiscovery protocols. What I found particularly interesting, however, is both courts provided fairly specific guidance on the scope of collection and preservation. In the case of the California court, which notes that its “guidelines are designed to establish best practices for evidence preservation in the digital age,” the Court offers a checklist for Rule 26(f) “meet and confer” conferences with good detail on suggested ESI preservation protocols. The Delaware Court of Chancery also issued a detailed checklist or “sample collection outline.” ESI preservation checklists are useful practice guides, and these are sanctioned by two separate influential courts."

Company emails are key in Apple, Google hiring case, judge says (Dan Levine)

"SAN JOSE, Calif, Jan 17 (Reuters) - Internal emails show that executives at tech companies such as Apple and Google believed that an agreement to refrain from poaching each other's workers would bring real financial benefits, a U.S. judge said on Thursday.

Five former employees of various tech companies have filed a civil lawsuit against Apple Inc, Google Inc, Intel Corp and others, alleging an illegal conspiracy to eliminate competition for each other's employees."

Court approves discovery questionnaire seeking social media information (Jesse Dill)

Employers and in-house counsel facing class-wide litigation received a welcome opinion from the District of Colorado to kick-off the new year. InEEOC v. The Original Honeybaked Ham Co. of Georgia, Inc., the court approved a questionnaire for claimants to identify numerous sources of electronic information, including that which could be used to access social media accounts.