Time is Money: Streamlining the E-Discovery Review Process
Live Date: November 10 at 1:00PM ETAlthough technology has eased the process in which electronic data is managed, secured, and produced for use as…
October 19, 2015 at 04:16 PM
2 minute read
Live Date: November 10 at 1:00PM ET
Although technology has eased the process in which electronic data is managed, secured, and produced for use as evidence, it is still a daunting and time consuming task. Nowhere is it more true that time is money than in the legal world. And the more time litigators and staff spend looking for documents the less time they spend on substantive work for clients. Legal firms and corporate counsel of all sizes need assess their e-discovery process—from putting in place efficient processes to gathering the right data and then storing, accessing and securing it in the most efficient manner possible.
Every firm and every case is different—so an e-discovery process that works well for one may not be the most effective for another. Corporations and law firms need IT capabilities tailored to their specific discovery requirements. To decide what those are, they should start by looking at their litigation portfolio and exposures, including the litigation costs for e-discovery, new automation tools and consider if it is time to rethink their approach to e-discovery.
Join LegalTech News for this live, interactive webcast, sponsored by Ipro and understand how to streamline your e-discovery process.
Sponsored by: Ipro
Register Now: http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=1079577&s=1&k=BA68EB58796CDD5978AB2C0EECD17D1C
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Beyond the finish line: Why the real race begins with CLM Post-Implementation Support
4 minute read
Emerging Technologies and Best Practices for Data Governance in Law Firms
2 minute read
Trending Stories
- 1Courts Beginning to Set Standards for Evidence Relying upon Artificial Intelligence
- 2First-Degree Murder Charge May Not Fit Mangione Case
- 3Legal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
- 4SDNY US Attorney Damian Williams Lands at Paul Weiss
- 5Litigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
