EDD Update

Law.Com's Legal Hold Series Links

Thank you to www.ediscoveryreadingroom.com for the following kind post and links to all eight parts in the Law.com series:

Legal Holds: a great series of primers from John Isaza and John Jablonski

A litigation hold is as an affirmative act by an organization to prevent the destruction of documents, including ESI and paper relevant to a lawsuit.   Law.com recently published a series of articles that provide an overview of the steps necessary to implement a legally defensible, written litigation hold and are based on the ”Seven Steps for Legal Holds of ESI and Other Documents” (ARMA International 2009) by John Isaza and John Jablonski.   The seven steps for legal holds are designed to help organizations tackle the seemingly daunting task of implementing written litigation holds. Here are links to each part of the series:

Step 1 for Legal Holds: Trigger Events
Step 2 for Legal Holds: Analyze the Trigger Event
Step 3 for Legal Holds: Define the Scope
Step 4 for Legal Holds: Implementation
Step 5 for Legal Holds: Enforcement
Step 6 for Legal Holds: Modification
Step 7 for Legal Holds: Monitor and Remove  
Oversight: Overseeing the Steps for Legal Holds

We added the link to the Oversight article.  The original post from The E-discovery Reading Room is available here.

HTCIA Asia Pacific Chapter Training Conference

I'm still trying to recover from jet lag after my return from speaking at the HTCIA Asia Pacific Chapter Training Conference in Hong Kong.  The HTCIA is the High Technology Crime Investigation Association, the world's largest association of computer forensic examiners.  Though it has a decidedly law enforcement bent--to the point of forbidding its members from assisting in the defense of criminal cases--there are probably as many non-law enforcement members in the group as cops.  Accordingly, there's been a growing interest in electronic discovery among the ranks of computer forensic examiners, particularly since the local forensic examiner is often the only competent "e-discovery service provider" willing to take on smaller matters involving electronic evidence.

How Rule 502 Affects Lawyers and E-Discovery

Chadbourne & Parke attorneys Robert Schwinger and Eric Twiste explain how the new Rule 502, which was signed into law last month, is intended to reduce significantly the costs of pre-production document and privilege review, especially in cases involving electronic discovery.

Katie's Corner #050108

At EDD Update, we link fairly regularly to vendor resources--websites, podcasts, webinars, white papers.  There are tons of these, and many are very useful.   But just a few years ago, a vendor website as a source of information might have been regarded with suspicion, if not dismissed outright.  Wouldn’t it just be self-promotion? 

Yes, of course. There’s self-promotion to a large extent.  But these sites can’t--and shouldn’t--be dismissed out of hand.  Given the hundreds of EDD companies out there, some companies have been looking for a way to be heard above the internet white noise--and providing valuable information to potential customers is one such way.  The result?  The customer wins.

EDD Showcase: Discovery Overload

Jason Baron's article, posted below, appeared in the January issue of Law Technology News.

Lawyers of a certain age — especially those of us who recall the joys of IBM selectric typewriters — must confront the fact that litigation today is a different animal, especially when it comes to search and retrieval issues posed by massive document productions.

Vendors Take Note!

Allow me please to comment on an excellent article written by the New York Law Journal's Anthony Lin entitled "Sullivan & Cromwell Suit Against Vendor Highlights Problems With E-Discovery" http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1199441137204

As many of my collegues, I occasionally find myself time quite enraged by the promises of certain EDD vendors that use all possible means known to man to land a project just to come up short in delivery.  It takes a tremendous effort and extensive experience to see through all their shenanigans during the "pitching process" in order to select a vendor that would not only stand by their promises but would work with you as well as your internal and external clients to adapt to the demands of a case and deliver the necessary service.

All of us know a few of those that get most of our business. Unfortunately, they constantly need to compete with the others that let's just say use less than ethical approach to land a project, often knowing in advance that they would not be able to deliver inside the required budget and time frame.

This is not an old-fashioned "vendor bashing" but rather a celebration of our bellowed industry's evolution to a new level where everyone involved in the complex process of EDD will carry responsibility for the quality of the work they submitted and promises they made.

I therefore highly encourage the vendor community to take note!