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...
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.
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.
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.
Last month we were among the first ediscovery service providers to add Equivio’s Zoom to our service offerings. So far, it has been a fantastic augmentation to our ReviewSmart (Lighthouse’s proprietary Technology Assisted Review) product. Our internal experts, led by a lawyer with a Master of Science in Computational Linguistics, can leverage Zoom’s capabilities to dramatically reduce our clients’ review costs while maintaining defensibility. In fact, we are currently using it to reduce a client’s costs in a large multi-language matter.