Digital White Papers

I L T A S U R V E Y R E S U L T S | L I T I G A T I O N A N D P R A C T I C E S U P P O R T 8 only increased. The static issues revolve around the reactionary nature of our need to handle client data as they implement technology solutions. In my experience, I have only dealt with one company who required a discovery review of all new technology BEFORE it was implemented / deployed. Most often, discovery of data sources is considered well after users adopt solutions and they contain relevant information. While we are now seeing more consistency in the technology being used and how it is being used, there continue to be surprises and non-conforming data. It will be interesting to see how and where responses to this question change in 2023… The survey relies on the work flow identified in the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) as that is the industry standard. It also 'buckets' activity nicely for us in evaluating what and how litigation and practice support professionals are working through the various discovery functions. The respondents to our survey do provide consulting and notable results for them are: • Identifying / Preserving - Collect to preserve and preservation in place are almost a 50:50 split for client data. Email, Loose Files and Messaging application data are the predominant data sources. • Collection - With only a few exceptions, law firms continue to support targeted (non-forensic) collections and custodian self-select. This is consistent with prior years' responses and I expect future survey results as the risk / costs associated with having law firm personnel maintain education / credentials in order to authenticate the collection of data can far outweigh the value. I believe we will see continued challenges with the discovery I L T A ' S 2 0 2 2 L I T I G A T I O N & P R A C T I C E S U P P O R T S U R V E Y R E S U L T S

• Cover