Since losing access to the server which hosted our blog site, I have been trying to update my blog posts with what I have on my hard drive. This has given me the opportunity to create a new paragraph as an update on where we stand today as opposed to where we stood almost 3 years ago when this blog site was launched. The thesis of DocReviewMD rings even truer today. Linear review lives on and is still the primary review approach being used. Nothing wrong with that. There are ways to do good reviews even with older tools. But it does take more effort and costs more. Studies show it is not more effective. So why do it? A lack of education. That is why we launched the Predictive Coding Thought Leadership Series tour in 2013. To try and teach simple statistics so lawyers can become more comfortable using technology to support reviews. This is just what the Doctor ordered. Read on and enjoy….
Originally posted on December 26, 2011
Doc Review MD was started to provide analysis on the place where attorneys and technology meet or should meet. Some topics will be more tangential than others, but in today’s e-discovery world or record management world, it is the challenges of review and creating order that causes most of the problems. Frankly the world of review is nothing short of a medical catastrophe so I figured it was time to give document review the medicine it needs. So starting from the place in legal projects which often times is concerned to be unsophisticated despite frequently creating the greatest costs, Doc Review MD will attempt to point out trends, observations and commentary on a place where few people dare to go; the place where the work is actually being done. Hopefully we will come up with some cures.
So given the relatively or rather extremely unsexy topic which seems rather straightforward, is there a risk that this blog will be obscure? Am I concerned that there will be little to write because review is awfully straightforward, right? Just read and click, read and click, read and click. Make sure everyone shows up. Check speed of reviewers and estimate if the project will finish on time. Quality Control check 10 percent of the work product if you have the budget. And so on and so on. Frankly, I am not concerned about these issues because it’s an important and extremely costly topic and the approach I just provided above is what most people do but frankly shows little understanding of what review entails or could entail. I am also emboldened by the recent AMLAW Top 100 blogs which includes entries with blogs for things like equestrian law
Given the number of document review attorneys who work in the field likely outnumbers the number of horses which raise legal issues, I am sure I can create something that is relevant to at least some people in the electronic discovery field. 18 years worth of experience in the field, and the effort I have put into creating and hosting over 160 ESIBytes podcasts also make me comfortable that there are many more stories that can be told in this space than most people would care to know. For example next excerpt will be aboutMed Pharma, Inc., v. Biomatrix, Inc, Civ. No. 03-3677 (DRD), Dec. 9, 2011, a recent case where 15 key words resulted in 96 million pages to be reviewed until the court stepped in and solved the problem and all the review companies in the region were despondent because they didn’t get the holiday gift they wished for of a multi-million dollar review project. This is the type of lawyering which needs to be talked about because while it involves no review, it could have been a bank breaker.
So with some help from technology, my friends and colleagues who tweet and forward to me interesting topics, and the personal knowledge that new review tools will spawn new types of reviews, I am looking forward to the task. Please feel free to let others know of this blog and I look forward to writing a second excerpt later this week.
- Karl Schieneman, Esq. aka Dr. Review