Hon. Paul Grimm and Kevin Brady of Redgrave Outline Admissibility of Digital Evidence

“Objection, foundation.”

To any seasoned trial attorney, the foundation objection shouldn’t trip up anyone. Akin to blocking and tackling in football, laying foundation for admission of evidence is almost taken for granted. But ask that same trial lawyer (only after a few adult beverages) if he or she has ever been tripped up on a foundation objection, many, if not most, will say they have. Heck, it happened to me on a couple of occasions when I was trying cases. Continue reading

57 Ways to Leave Your (Linear) Lover

A Case Study on Using Catalyst’s Insight Predict to Find Relevant Documents Without SME Training

A Big Four accounting firm with offices in Tokyo recently asked Catalyst to demonstrate the effectiveness of Insight Predict, technology assisted review (TAR) based on continuous active learning (CAL), on a Japanese language investigation. They gave us a test population of about 5,000 documents which had already been tagged for relevance. In fact, they only found 55 relevant documents during their linear review.

We offered to run a free simulation designed to show how quickly Predict would have found those same relevant documents. The simulation would be blind (Predict would not know how the documents were tagged until it presented its ranked list). That way we could simulate an actual Predict review using CAL. Continue reading

Using TAR Across Borders: Myths & Facts

As the world gets smaller, legal and regulatory compliance matters increasingly encompass documents in multiple languages. Many legal teams involved in cross-border matters, however, still hesitate to use technology assisted review (TAR), questioning its effectiveness and ability to handle non-English document collections.  They perceive TAR as a process that involves “understanding” documents. If the documents are in a language the system does not understand, then TAR cannot be effective, they reason.

The fact is that, done properly, TAR can be just as effective for non-English as it is for English documents. This is true even for the complex Asian languages including Chinese, Japanese and Korean (CJK). Although these languages do not use standard English-language delimiters such as spaces and punctuation, they are nonetheless candidates for the successful use of TAR. Continue reading

Catalyst Insight Review By Brett Burney

Recently, Brett Burney, e-discovery consultant and founder of Burney Consultants, reviewed Catalyst’s Insight Discovery search and review capabilities, which are part of Catalyst’s full EDRM platform comprising of Insight Legal Hold and Collect, Search & Review, Predict and Business Intelligence. We invited Brett to share his insights as a guest author.

Catalyst Insight – Lightning Quick, Responsive Review Platform for Instantly Searching Millions of Digital Files with a Built-In Continuous Active Learning Predictive Analytics Engine

It seems that Catalyst has always been on a mission to push the boundaries of applying advanced text analytics to enormous amounts of electronically stored information for eDiscovery and investigatory purposes… and it’s exciting to watch. Continue reading

Part II: Practical Considerations for U.S. Legal Teams Taking Discovery to Asia

[This is the second in a two-part Q&A between Rachel Teisch, Catalyst’s director of product marketing, and Dave Sannar, Catalyst’s head of Asia operations. Part I discussed trends and cultural differences U.S. legal teams should be aware of before embarking on cross-border discovery in Asia. Part II focuses on tactical considerations for collecting, processing, reviewing and transferring data subject to litigation, investigations and regulatory compliance.] Continue reading

Part I: Q&A with Dave Sannar on E-Discovery Trends in Asia

[This is the first of a two-part Q&A between Dave Sannar, Catalyst’s head of Asia operations, and Rachel Teisch, Catalyst’s director of product marketing. Part I discusses trends in Asia discovery. Part II focuses on tactical considerations for collecting, processing, reviewing and transferring data subject to litigation, investigations and regulatory compliance.] Continue reading

The Importance of Contextual Diversity in Technology Assisted Review

How do you know what you don’t know? This is a classic problem when searching a large volume of documents in litigation or an investigation.

In a technology assisted review (TAR), a key concern for some is whether the algorithm has missed important relevant documents, especially those that you may know nothing about at the outset of the review. This is because most modern TAR systems focus exclusively on relevance feedback, which means that the system feeds you the unreviewed documents that are likely to be the most relevant because they are most like what you have already coded as relevant. In other words, what is highly ranked depends on the documents that were tagged previously. Continue reading

Five Steps to Better Oversight and Control of E-Discovery Spend

What’s in your legal data warehouse? Don’t know? Or don’t have one? If you work at a law firm, there’s no imperative to create a mechanism to share data elsewhere—outside counsel concerns are winning cases. For corporate legal departments, however, it’s a problem: in-house counsel, legal operations professionals and even the c-suite are increasingly asking for more effective oversight and control over e-discovery spend.

“What gets measured gets managed,” the late management consultant Peter Drucker reportedly said. How, in practical terms, are corporate legal departments measuring and managing? Are legal departments incorporating business intelligence (BI) into their day-to-day operations to get the data and analytics they need to be more efficient and manage legal spend more effectively? Continue reading

Four Areas to Reduce Legal Hold and Collection Spend

With organizations allocating up to 50 percent of their legal spend to litigation, savvy legal teams are seeking new ways reduce their e-discovery costs. Improving legal hold management and collection is one place to start.

In this blog post, I will highlight the costliest areas of legal hold and collection per matter for organizations relying on a combination of vendors and firms to help manage the process. I will then compare the costs of these tasks to the costs of using automated cloud-based legal hold and collection software that offers a flat-fee enterprise license for unlimited custodians, holds and data collection. Continue reading

Legal Holds for Smart Teams: Tips for IT Professionals Working with Legal to Preserve Company Data

As I recently wrote about in Law360, when litigation or a government investigation looms, a corporation has a duty to identify and preserve data (documents or other electronically-stored information) that may be relevant to the matter. This requirement, imposed by the courts as well as government regulators, is known as a “legal hold”  or sometimes a “litigation hold.” It stems from the duty to not destroy relevant evidence that may be required for a judicial proceeding.

Increasingly, courts require legal departments and their outside counsel to supervise the preservation process and to certify that reasonable steps were taken. In most cases, lawyers must rely heavily on Information Technology (IT) professionals to execute the mechanics of the hold and ensure data is preserved correctly. After all, IT knows and works with the company’s systems, networks. And, if legal preservation obligations aren’t met properly, penalties for that failure can be substantial. Continue reading