Brought to you free by Recommind
Proactively Navigate Cross-Border E-Discovery and Data Privacy
Anthony J. Diana, a partner at Mayer Brown, and Gabriela P. Baron, vice president of business development at Xerox Litigation Services, write: In today's global economy, litigants in U.S. courts increasingly need information created abroad in response to discovery requests and subpoenas. Furthermore, with the advent of cloud computing, litigants face additional challenges when accessing data that originated overseas.
Computers vs. Humans? Putting the TREC 2009 Study in Perspective
Steve Green, chief of staff of Hudson Legal, and Mark Yacano, executive vice president at the company, review an article that is widely cited for its conclusion that technology-assisted review can be more accurate than manual review and discuss whether that conclusion was warranted by the study data on which the article was based.
Second Circuit Rejects Bright-Line Test for Failure to Issue Hold Notice
Vivian Maese, Ben Barnett and Lindsey Stelcen of Dechert analyze a decision that resets the standard for conduct of litigants in the Second Circuit with respect to the preservation of documents and data in litigation, and, more broadly, may reflect a rising level of appellate skepticism about the creation of hard-and-fast prospective rules in the area of e-discovery separated from the facts of individual cases.
Every Good Document Review Starts With Human Expertise
Howard J. Reissner, chief executive officer at Planet Data, and Ian K. Hochman, special counsel at Willkie Farr & Gallagher, write: While there is little doubt that technology assisted review has a more prominent role in document review today than it did even one or two years ago, the use of technology to enhance document review has been developing for the past 15 years. The reality is that TAR is not all that new, and the fundamentals of a successful document review still remain the same.
