Why Your Document Review Strategy is Likely Broken
Remember when bringing legal hold software in house was a big deal?! Times have changed and now innovative, cost-conscious legal departments are heavily investing in legal technologies that focus on the entire e-discovery process.
September 28, 2021 at 12:32 PM
1 minute read
Webcast
Date: Thursday, November 4, 2021
Time: 1:00 pm ET | 10:00am PT
Cost: Complimentary
Sponsored by:
Remember when not tracking spending metrics around document review was commonplace? With growing data volumes leading to rising document review costs and a variety of new data privacy risks, an in-house litigator's mindset must evolve to re-think their document review strategy. Now innovative, cost-conscious legal departments are heavily investing in people, process, and technology that focus on updating how they work with third parties (law firms, vendors) when conducting document review to save them time, money and ensure defensibility.
Attend this webcast to learn…
- Why your document review strategy may be broken if you are still using third parties to conduct all review activities
- How to optimize your document review process for more control, lower costs and earlier identification of key information
- Best practices and examples of how other legal departments have done this
Speakers:
Linda Luperchio | Director of E-Discovery | Hanover Insurance
Mike Hamilton | VP E-Discovery | Exterro
Can't attend? Register here for an on-demand recording after the webcast.
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 All
Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
![Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/276/2024/10/Image-request_767x633pxl.jpg "Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]")
Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
4 minute read
Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
5 minute readTrending Stories
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
