From Big Law to Legal Tech, Cat Casey Sees E-Discovery Renaissance
DISCO's first chief innovation officer says eager investors in legal tech, ballooning data created by lawyers' clients, and a greater need for advanced analytics are fueling e-discovery's renaissance.
May 08, 2019 at 09:00 AM
4 minute read
These days, individuals and businesses are leaving a larger digital footprint through the growing use of emails, apps and internet-connected devices. In response, e-discovery vendors are entering a new frontier of leveraging advanced technology and expanding their solutions beyond just e-discovery, said Catherine “Cat” Casey, DISCO's first chief innovation officer.
On Tuesday, Casey joined the e-discovery company after nearly three years at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher where she served as global director of the firm's e-discovery and practice technology team. She said she left Gibson Dunn because the legal market was reaching an “inflection point” with advanced technology and she wanted to shepherd a company through the “next chapter of e-discovery.”
The 15-year e-discovery veteran joined DISCO because of the company's use of advanced technology and its trajectory. Her hire comes roughly four months after DISCO announced it raised $83 million in investments. At the time, DISCO CEO Kiwi Camara said the company intended to expand its solutions beyond e-discovery with CaseBuilder, a workflow product.
Casey discusses how the eagerness among investors for legal tech, the ballooning data created by lawyers' clients, and a greater need for advanced analytics are ushering in the new chapter in e-discovery.
The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Legaltech News: Do e-discovery platforms have to expand their capabilities beyond e-discovery to stay relevant to lawyers' needs?
Catherine “Cat” Casey: It's a natural evolution. If you look at people's roles that are in e-discovery, they don't actually say e-discovery, they are involved with case management, data governance. As data becomes more central and pivotal to business … those sort of practices and procedures are expanding into dealing with how to structure data [and] how to manage that data.
It's a need of the legal industry to have that one-stop solution that will handle all aspects of lawyers' day-to-day [needs]. Step one is CaseBuilder, but there's a long path forward. I think companies understand attorneys need an ally as they navigate their evolving role to help them embrace technology. It's less about staying relevant for the provider and more about one-sizing the solution that is offered for the attorney and matching what they need.
What are those new needs lawyers are facing now?
Those evolving needs are an ability to look into a variety of data, whether it's from applications, laptops, an Alexa or Fitbits. Attorneys need tools and guides to navigate the evolving way people are communicating.
Do you see more e-discovery providers offering more solutions outside of e-discovery?
Yes, I think because the needs of attorneys are evolving because there is so much data and if a legal technology company wants to continue to evolve and adapt with the needs of an attorney they will have to adapt.
What's driving that new appetite for change in legal?
What I've seen in the last 18 months [is] the individual proprietary tools that are being invested in. You see a massive injection of capital into the cloud-based providers. There's an appetite for better and faster [technology] that has never been seen before and is in part being driven by the massive amount of data even in small cases.
Historically, how we have done things won't be enough [to understand a lot of data]. You have to use advanced technology, and I feel the interest is driven by understanding that the needs of attorneys and buyers of e-discovery have become bigger and more complex and more challenging. And the companies that can [meet those needs] are the ones you are seeing getting a lot of funding because there's a lot of consultants scouring across the e-discovery space and picking the providers that are best positioned not just to merge but to continue innovating and match the evolving obligations that law is facing.
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
© 2024 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 AllHow I Made Office Managing Partner: 'When the Firm Needs Something Done, Raise Your Hand,' Says Eric Kennedy of Buchalter
How I Made Partner: 'Persevere Through the Challenging Times,' Says Jennifer Daglio of Hunton Andrews Kurth
How I Made Partner: 'It’s Valuable to Get Comfortable Being Uncomfortable,' Says Ryan Ulloa of White & Case
Trending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
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