The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association
Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/230349
Alison Silverstein is the Managing Director of McDermott Discovery at McDermott Will & Emery LLP. She is a recognized industry expert in the analysis, negotiation and execution of data discovery. An experienced consultant, Alison has extensive knowledge of product strategy, data recovery, software development, operational techniques and recovery processes. Contact her at asilverstein@mwe.com. Geoffrey Vance is a litigation partner in the Chicago office of McDermott Will & Emery LLP. He is also the leader of the McDermott Discovery practice group, a group whose focus is to leverage advanced technology to improve and reduce the cost of discovery and other legal services. Contact him at gvance@mwe.com. Predictive coding has been particularly buzz-worthy in 2013, likely because finally there is empirical data that objectively show the technology yields better, more accurate results than traditional linear review at a substantial cost reduction, sometimes by as much as 85 percent. Yet, despite the objective evidence of its effectiveness and cost-savings, predictive coding continues to meet resistance from law firms and clients alike. We'd like to help reverse this trend and examine the false premises on which the predictive coding naysayers have historically relied. Here come the myth busters! ONCE UPON A TIME… Twenty years ago, with email use on the rise and data storage capacity expanding rapidly, law firms and discovery vendors began a swift expansion of service offerings to meet the skyrocketing demand surrounding the discovery of electronic data. Those e-discovery offerings, however, were simply old paper-based services repackaged for use with email messages and word processing files. Methodologies varied, but the objective remained consistent: Make it as much like a paper copy as possible. Initially, this was done because of familiarity, but ultimately it was because the "look at everything" approach was incredibly profitable. Despite technological advances, the legal profession, including the defense bar and discovery vendors hired by defense lawyers and their clients, has continued marching doggedly down the same "look at everything" path. Until recently, the rule remained that attorneys must read everything to ensure the team has identified what is privileged and Peer to Peer 69