Our court reporters, conference rooms, videographers, last-minute coverage, and interpreters can be immediately scheduled all at once in convenient locations in any city nationwide. Many of our clients have benefited from the time we save them, and they have realized how it lessens the stresses of their jobs. We hope that you utilize our services nationwide and locally so you can benefit, as well.
As always, we welcome your suggestions and comments about this e-newsletter, and we would also like to share any articles you have written about the discovery process.
IT and Legal Walk into a Bar: Why Strong Interdepartmental Relationships are a Must in E-Discovery
By Jim Gill
The E in E-Discovery requires expertise in tech as well as law, and the most successful in-house legal teams bring those disciplines together. Legal professionals become more technology savvy. IT team members begin to understand the e-discovery process and how to help Legal preserve and collect the required data. But in order to reach the highest levels of efficiency, you have to have a strong working relationship with open lines of communication between all of the key players involved.
This question of how to work effectively with your IT or Legalcounterpart is a complicated one. Not only do Legal and IT professionals come from different backgrounds, they often tend to speak different professional languages. Two different worlds, different languages.
At last week’s ILTACON in Washington, D.C., Beth Patterson, Chief Legal and Technology Services Officer for Allens in Sydney, asked a panel why e-discovery service providers couldn’t standardize hash values so as to support identification and deduplication across products and collections. If they did, you could use work from one matter in another. If an e-mail is privileged in one case, there’s a good chance it’s privileged in another; so, wouldn’t it be splendid to be able to flag its counterparts to insure it doesn’t slip through without review?
Beth asked a great question and one regrettably characterized by the panel as “a big technical challenge.”
One panelist got off on the right foot: He said, “I’ve created artificial hashes in the past where what I had to do was aggregate and normalize metadata across different data sets to create a custom fingerprint to do that.” But, he added, “That’s probably not defensible, and it’s also really cumbersome.” Read full article
Connect With Us!
Subscribe to this e-newsletter here.
Access more articles for legal professionals here.