How to Make eDiscovery An Effective Solution Rather Than a Burden
eDiscovery is required for enterprise and government litigation cases, where large datasets need to be reduced in no time. However, at times this approach can create more problems than it solves in legal cases.
The slow pace of legal proceedings can portray the approach as a flawed and defective one. Lawyers may be challenged with culling data efficiently, which can make the process an expensive one. Risk reduction opportunities are being wasted, which can make some people weary of the eDiscovery process.
One main motive of electronic data discovery is culling data to reduce costs and enhance the effectiveness of the evidence location, thereby facilitating fair judgments by the courts. The following should be understood by the legal community to derive a better understanding of the process:
- eDiscovery process vary – e discovery companies are trying their best to elicit credible and favorable contributions in terms of efficiency and accuracy. However, there is no means of ascertaining a level of perfection or a perfect approach.
- Cost-effectiveness – Reducing costs is a top priority of legal eDiscovery processes. Cost-effectiveness can be better achieved throughout an ongoing process in which many situations need to be changed or adapted for affirmative legal decisions. Multiple challenges will arise, and using these tools to adapt to the demands of each circumstance will help eliminate unnecessary costs.
-
Accentuating the worth of the defense mechanism – As no single approach is 100% perfect, eDiscovery can prove to be a worthwhile process when it provides the ability to cull documents and maintain an audit trail that increases defensibility as a case proceeds. Important documents that were culled and the specific keywords that were used can give better insight into how to progress and how to make the process more effective. This can help lawyers minimize their doubts, errors and guess work, which are all detrimental to effective eDiscovery procedures.
-
Preservation and collection procedures – Though preservation is the first step toward a positive case ending, the challenge lies in preserving the right evidence by identifying the main components, such as data types and data ranges. With the preservation stage under control, collection is the next challenging step. Collection predominantly facilitates the monitoring and updating process that propels the case forward.
-
Technical knowledge handicap – Most judges and lawyers are not well-versed in the technicalities of the IT environment and require sound technical support to understand its systems and functions, like email servers, shared network drives, archival repositories and systems, instant messaging systems, records management, knowledge management, etc. A technical expert can help attorneys comprehend the world of technology and use its components advantageously.
-
Tight Deadlines – Many times the client or those at the client’s end have to work with their investigating teams to meet tight deadlines. It is important to ensure that the people chosen to testify can accomidate court dictated deadlines. In such a scenario, eDiscovery must also occur within the required timeframe.
Understanding the limitations and working out innovative solutions will result in a more effective eDiscovery tool. Taking care to reinforce the loose ends, such as building a strong team, allocating a budget, assessing the risk profile, preparing the ground for an early case assessment and working with a steady search pattern will help give direction towards your goal.. If you do not use the evidence effectively, eDiscovery efforts go to waste.
Processing your request, Please wait....
