Litigation is a relatively common occurrence in the construction industry. Whether it’s related to disputes, delays, or mishaps, legal battles are an evergreen concern. And one significant challenge associated with construction litigation is the volume of data involved – specifically, electronically stored data (ESI).

When preparing the often-vast amounts of ESI for litigation, utilizing technology can be essential. And legal teams have two options for support: in-house or outsourcing to a vendor partner. Oftentimes when technology is needed, the only real answer is with outsourcing as most law firms and companies don’t have internal eDiscovery resources. 

eDiscovery continues to shape the landscape of litigation strategy and many law firms are looking into ways to create an internal eDiscovery practice – one that might help them gain a competitive advantage, while streamlining the litigation process. I recently wrote an eBook, “How to Build an eDiscovery Practice at Your Law Firm: From Someone Who Has Done it Before.” that gives a comprehensive overview of not only how to bring eDiscovery into your firm, but highlighting the opportunities for...

Corporate legal teams often face significant financial challenges, particularly when preparing for litigation. One of the most pressing issues is the concept of “sunk costs” associated with eDiscovery. 

Americans love social media - about 9% consider themselves to be an influencer! In January 2024, the Pew Research Center reported that 83% of American adults use YouTube, 68% use Facebook, and 47% use Instagram. Most users have accounts on multiple platforms and many actively create content.

That all adds up to a whole lot of potentially discoverable data. 

Litigators and eDiscovery practitioners often face a common document review challenge when preparing for litigation – too many documents (and too little time to get through them). Linear review, that is, reviewing every document individually, is the most appropriate option in certain situations, but can often be complemented by predictive coding. This is a defensible way to create massive time and cost savings, preserving budget for merits counsel, not for eDiscovery and document review partners

Our mission is to provide litigator-led eDiscovery – meaning we approach every client with recommendations from the perspective of practicing attorneys. Each matter is unique – and we’re not in the business of shilling for any particular software provider.

With multiple eDiscovery partners we make a recommendation based on the unique circumstances of each matter. Every platform has one or more strengths, and having multiple partners allows us to keep tabs on market changes, separate innovation...

In January we published a tongue in cheek bingo card before Legalweek that poked fun of many of the words and phrases used by eDiscovery software and services providers, like “voluminous data” and “explosion of data.”

It was a silly thing, but it resonated because the terms were all so ubiquitous.

More than 23 billion text messages were sent from cell phones daily in 2023. Consequently, the collection of messages will likely be a topic of conversation during a litigation or investigation. After balancing the issues of the case, the ability to obtain information from other sources, the potential relevance of cell phone data, and the time consuming and costly nature of cell phone collection, collection may be needed. Proper data collection and handling of messages is difficult, especially...

By its very nature, eDiscovery is serious work. Truly, whenever litigators and legal professionals get together, it’s probably serious because the outcome of litigation, investigations, and government actions carry massive financial and emotional consequences for adverse parties and counsel.