White Glove Service for Orange County’s Hospitality Industry“: Driven by Passionate People, Stokes Wagner Provides 5-Star Legal Services to Those in the... NETWORKING Planning, Persistence, and Practice: Do not just attend an event—attend with purpose. To go with purpose means setting... Things Lawyers Do ...: I just took my first long vacation in, well, pretty much ever. I’ve taken time off... Do Not Overspend On Law Firm Office Space: When lawyers are selecting office space for their law office, the decision is often very... How to Meet a New Prospect Without Cold-Calling: Icome from a skiing family—not a "luxury condo at Vail" kind of skiing family, but more... Expectations for Persuasive Female Litigators: One way to stir up a controversy is to talk about the social expectations that apply to... Why Your Law Firm’s Blog Probably Sucks: Can we get real here for a minute? Most law firm blogs suck. They really, really suck.... Community News – October 2018: Song Richardson, Dean of UCI Law, received the 2018 “Be The Change” Legal Excellence... A Hands-On Approach to Attorney Referrals: A Successful Strategy for this Southern California Family Attorney - There’s no better... Speaking from Experience: When it comes to personal injury cases, Sean S. Vahdat speaks eloquently from education,...
Executive Presentations-468x60-1

Early Case Assessment (ECA) – Before 26(f)

Maybe Yes No Keys Representing DecisionsUsing early case assessment (ECA) to prepare for the 26(f ) “meet  and  confer” helps  practitioners address the issues and challenges of preserving discoverable data and aids development of a “discovery plan” which establishes the foundation for effective discovery. The more you know early on about the location and volume of your electronically stored information (ESI) and the client’s preferences regarding document review, the better prepared you will be to conduct a successful 26(f ) conference and face the challenges that surround the collection of ESI.

“Meet and Confer” Pitfalls
The meet and confer continues to be a challenge for many attorneys. An unsuccessful meet and confer can damage an attorney’s credibility in the eyes of his client, frustrate the judge and opposing counsel, and result in burdensome costs. When the two sides fail to hammer out details during the meet and confer, they will often find themselves spending more time arguing about discovery than the merits of the case itself.

Failure to communicate about the data pool could result in relevant ESI not coming to light. There is also the risk that non-responsive information may be over-produced. When this happens, it can be difficult to determine whether the monetary and legal magnitude of the case is proportional to the expenses associated with e-discovery. ECA can help you find the right balance that will result in cost savings without increased risk or decreased defensibility.

What  ECA Tells You about  the Data,  and How It Can Reduce Costs

There are three key areas in which ECA tools can give you a big step up in approaching a 26(f ) conference:

  • Knowing the scope of the data set will allow you to more accurately estimate the processing, hosting and review costs.
  • Knowing what types of data need to be reviewed will help determine how long the review will take so that reasonable time lines can be established. This information is critical in negotiating production dates, and it may also help determine if reviewers with special skills are required.
  • Sampling key search terms in advance allows for better negotiation of final terms and may provide support for the use of clustering or other technology- assisted review workflow.

ECA tools also have the potential to help make meet and confer preparation and execution a more automated, step- by-step process. Tools like Fios Clarify, for example, allow reports to be run on a broad variety of metrics, such as the number of Excel files, emails or unprintable files you have in your entire data population. Clarify also allows all searches and results to be saved so that the sampling process is well- documented – making it both repeatable and defensible.

Instead of processing all the data associated with a case, which can be costly, you can use ECA tools to cull the data by custodian, date, file type and/or key terms. A good tool will allow you to run searches and either bulk tag or tag individual documents that should be further processed and loaded on the chosen review tool. If you cull the data pre- processing, you eliminate the need to process, host or review the entire population and thereby save your client significant time and expense.

Seize the Strategic  Advantage
Finally, keep in mind that effective use of quality ECA tools doesn’t just save money. It can also give you an important strategic advantage in pursuing the case. Knowing your clients’ data set very early in the discovery process allows you to be much better prepared not only for negotiating custodians and search terms, but also for persuasively arguing the legal merits of the case. Simply put, these tools are easy to use and economical, put you in a much stronger position when conferring with your adversary, and ultimately save you and your client many potential headaches.

Samantha Green

Samantha Green serves as e-Discovery Counsel for DTI. She is an attorney with over 10 years experience. Samantha has substantial expertise in all aspects of electronic discovery, including drafting best practices for both law firms and corporate clients, as well as formulating workflow solutions for large discovery projects. She has an in depth understanding of electronic discovery, litigation readiness, ESI hosting, review and production processes as well as the different technology and business approaches and cost implications associated with each. Samantha has taken cases from pre-discovery through trial. Samantha has advised, written and spoken on all phases of the electronically stored information (ESI) life cycle with a broad range of experience in initial case assessment and engagement management. She has worked on many government investigations, including FCPA and antitrust matters, as well as, second requests and litigations that cross all spectrums. Prior to joining DTI, Samantha was the e-Discovery Attorney for Blank Rome LLP.

More Posts

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)
www.pdf24.org    Send article as PDF   

Filed Under: Practice Management

About the Author: Samantha Green serves as e-Discovery Counsel for DTI. She is an attorney with over 10 years experience. Samantha has substantial expertise in all aspects of electronic discovery, including drafting best practices for both law firms and corporate clients, as well as formulating workflow solutions for large discovery projects. She has an in depth understanding of electronic discovery, litigation readiness, ESI hosting, review and production processes as well as the different technology and business approaches and cost implications associated with each. Samantha has taken cases from pre-discovery through trial. Samantha has advised, written and spoken on all phases of the electronically stored information (ESI) life cycle with a broad range of experience in initial case assessment and engagement management. She has worked on many government investigations, including FCPA and antitrust matters, as well as, second requests and litigations that cross all spectrums. Prior to joining DTI, Samantha was the e-Discovery Attorney for Blank Rome LLP.

RSSComments (0)

Trackback URL

Leave a Reply

  • Polls