Directory:Litigation software

MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Thursday June 20, 2024
Revision as of 11:02, 22 November 2010 by Sean.davis (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Defensible Litigation Support Software

As the amount of electronically stored information (ESI) has grown, using litigation software for keyword search has become increasingly important in electronic data discovery as a way to uncover relevant information and cull–down large amounts of ESI prior to review. Without keyword search, electronic data discovery would be virtually impossible due to its duration and high cost. Nevertheless, while vital to electronic data discovery, keyword search is not perfect. It can produce results that are both over and under–inclusive, finding non–relevant documents and missing potentially relevant documents.

As the use of litigation software to conduct keyword search has increased, the way it’s being used in electronic data discovery is receiving more scrutiny from the courts. Recent opinions, such as Judge Grimm’s in Victor Stanley v Creative Pipe, Inc 2008 WL 2221841 (D. Md. May 29, 2008), highlight some of the limitations of keyword search using litigation software and outline approaches that attorneys can employ to defensibly use keyword search given these limitations. Addressing the limitations of keyword search while following these approaches in practice, however, is challenging. The technology largely used today to perform keyword search in electronic data discovery was originally designed for other purposes and works as a “black box.” This black box design is a major reason why using keyword search for litigation discovery makes it difficult to follow the defensible practices outlined in case law. A new, more transparent approach to search is needed to remove the black box and address the shortcomings of today’s litigation discovery search technology. This new transparent search technology enables attorneys and litigation support professionals to defensibly utilize search best practices during litigation discovery. Transparent search also reduces the over and under–inclusiveness of keyword search during litigation, improving search effectiveness and saving cost and time.

Addressing the issues with today’s litigation support software search technology and meeting the unique needs of electronic data discovery consumers requires a new approach to search. Instead of a black box, search needs to become more transparent. Electronic data discovery users need greater visibility into their litigation software’s search process so they can understand how the results were obtained and reduce the over and under–inclusiveness of keyword search. Their litigation support software also needs greater transparency so they can easily follow and document defensible best practices including testing, sampling, and iterative refinement, and leverage the ability to run multiple queries at once. Specifically, a transparent search solution that meets these needs is required.

Defensible Litigation Discovery Search with Clearwell Transparent Search

The Clearwell E Discovery Platform’s Transparent Search features enable a more defensible electronic data discovery search process and enhance the ability to cull irrelevant information. The solution includes four capabilities that provide a new level of visibility, interactivity, and auditing of the e discovery search process: Search Preview, Search Filters, and Search Report.

Related Link-

eDiscovery Software