This month’s feature article focuses on some best practices in predictive coding. We also reran articles about the benefits of an investigator in discovery and the “dance” of trial preparation.
We will continue to provide you with useful discovery information and tools because we take a genuine interest in the legal community beyond just court reporting.
We are committed to helping our clients in every way we can, so please let us know how we can help your out-of-town and local deposition planning go smoothly.
Best Practices in Predictive Coding: When are Pre-Culling and Keyword Searching Defensible?
By Jim Eidelman Catalyst
Predictive coding is an effective e-discovery tool for ranking large sets of documents. However, it is commonly performed in a manner that may be severely under-inclusive and, therefore, raises concerns about its defensibility.
In the use of predictive coding, it is a common practice for the producing party to run keyword searches first and then sample and rank the resulting documents. The documents that don’t hit on the searches are culled out before reaching the predictive coding process.
The reasons for doing it this way are:
Keyword searching is an accepted standard in e-discovery.
The client can avoid the per-document cost for the predictive coding software.
It reduces the number of documents that need to be reviewed and produced, which reduces time, cost, and risk.
However, this approach ignores the “dirty little secret” of e-discovery search — that keyword searches leave behind a large set of responsive/relevant documents. Read full article >>
The Case of the Missing Acronyms, Or How to Avoid Having to C.Y.A. in Search
By Bob Ambrogi Former editor-in-chief of The National Law Journal
You don’t have to read too many legal documents to know that lawyers love to use acronyms and abbreviations. Why is it, then, that lawyers sometimes forget about acronyms and abbreviations when constructing keyword searches? If you’re going to search for “Federal Trade Commission,” shouldn’t you also search for “FTC”?
A recent order by a U.S. magistrate judge in the Southern District of California is a reminder of why lawyers should never forget about acronyms and abbreviations in e-discovery. Further, the ruling underscores the importance of thinking about these terms early on in a case.
Read full article >>