<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none;" alt="" src="https://dc.ads.linkedin.com/collect/?pid=513385&amp;fmt=gif">

Speaking the Same Language

The Benefits of Cross-Functional Communication

Published Fri, July 06, 2012 by Nathaniel Byington

Have you ever been in a foreign city where you don’t speak the language? Even with a phrase book, clear enunciation, and a full range of pantomime, your communications are limited to the most basic concepts. You’ll be able to ask things like “Where is the nearest bus station?” or “Is this really edible?”, but until you learn the language or find someone who speaks your language, you’ll never be able to discuss more complex (and more interesting) concepts like culture, history, or politics. While it’s less obvious, this same language gap...

TAR and Review of Opposition Documents

Published Fri, June 22, 2012 by Beau Holt, Esq.

Many vendors, law firms and clients think of TAR primarily as a means of reducing costs associated with review of unproduced documents.  However, legal technology pundits, litigators, in-house counsel and judges are still working through defensibility issues associated with use of Technology Assisted Review (TAR) in discovery settings.  Many corporate clients are not yet ready to risk judicial rejection of TAR-based reviews and still shy away from TAR.  Many law firms are equally risk-averse.  Other law firms are unsure how to leverage TAR...

Is Linear Review a Thing of the Past?

Published Fri, June 08, 2012 by Debora Motyka Jones, Esq.

With all the TAR postings in the last couple of months, you may be wondering whether linear review is passé.  Quite the contrary, we actually believe linear review has a valuable place in ediscovery.  There are phases of review, certain data sizes, and specific data types well suited to linear review.  It can be a very powerful tool when utilized in a thoughtful and deliberate manner.

Precision Culling with TAR

Published Mon, May 21, 2012 by Nathaniel Byington

Typically we think of technology assisted review (TAR) as a tool for finding relevant documents. Sometimes, however, TAR shines best as a tool for identifying irrelevant documents. Compared to even the most well-refined search terms, TAR can draw a much more precise line between documents that are not relevant and documents that might be relevant. This approach offers a very effective culling mechanism.

Why is Privilege Review so Expensive and What Can We Do About It?

Published Tue, May 08, 2012 by Debora Motyka Jones, Esq.

We all know that document review is generally very expensive.  In fact, in the often quoted Da Silva Moore case, the defendants stated that they expected their review costs to be about $5/document.  On a 500,000 document case, that’s $2.5 million dollars!  With privilege review being one of the most expensive types of document review, it seems a likely target for cost reduction measures.  But, how do you do so without risking waiver?  There are technologies out there that can help.

Sign Up For The Illuminating eDiscovery Blog

Lighthouse’s Illuminating eDiscovery Blog features thought leadership pieces ranging from simple tips and tricks and industry event takeaways, to case law changes and ediscovery standards. These pieces are developed by technology and legal experts and focused on providing readers with practical tips that  they can put in place in their professional lives.