Litigation Support Jobs are HOT HOT HOT!

Litigation Support Careers says there’s plenty of jobs out there right now.  Here are a few of the hot ones:

ED Project Manager – Austin

Senior E-Discovery Project Manager –
Seattle

Associate E-Discovery Project Manager –  Seattle

Project Manager – San Francisco

e-Discovery Course Instructors – U.S., E.U., Asia

 

Lit Support Manager – New York

Check out more at Litigation Support Careers.

Court Orders Monetary Sanctions for Production Delay Resulting from Counsel’s Failure to Become Familiar with Plaintiff’s Retention Policies and Systems

In re A&M Fla. Props. II, LLC, 2010 WL 1418861 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Apr. 7, 2010)

By: Bree Kelly (K&L Gates eDiscovery Law)

Where plaintiff’s counsel “failed in his obligation to locate and produce all relevant documents in a timely manner” by failing to gain a sufficient understanding of plaintiff’s computer systems resulting in significantly delayed production of relevant documents, the court declined to impose terminating sanctions or an adverse inference but ordered monetary sanctions against plaintiff and counsel in an amount to be determined. (Read full article)

The Cowen Group Predicts 215 New eDiscovery Jobs

60 Percent of Legal Industry Expects to Hire eDiscovery Staff in Next Six Months

NEW YORK April 15, 2010 — Proper handling of electronic information during litigation remains a critical challenge for law firms and corporations. The Cowen Group, a leading provider of staffing services and information for the legal technology sector, completed its Q1 Critical Trends Survey on Tuesday, collecting responses from managers of 78 AmLaw Litigation Support Departments, 47 Corporate eDiscovery Departments, and 37 vendor service providers. The Cowen Group’s survey revealed four key trends: Staff Hours have increased since Q4 2009 at 61% of law firms, 51% of vendors, and 35% of corporations. Workloads from new cases have increased since Q4 2009 at 65% of law firms, 46% of vendors, and 22% of corporations. Workloads from existing cases have increased since Q4 2009 at 47% of law firms, 38% of vendors, and 17% of corporations. Plans to add to staff in the next three months have increased at 65% of vendors, 60% of law firms, and 35% of corporations. This survey reinforces the growing demand for Project Managers, Regional Managers and eDiscovery Attorneys, which are critical to the continued evolution of the industry. Project Managers are gaining greater prominence in the industry due to the increasing size of datasets and heightened concern around controlling costs, limiting risks, and guaranteeing outcomes. Regional Managers are also increasingly important as departments become more mature. Another important role is the eDiscovery Attorney which is emerging as a leader in many eDiscovery departments. This role requires a sound understanding of the law and legal writing skills, hands on experience with eDiscovery and business savvy. Other key results of the survey include: 39% of corporations would consider outsourcing new eDiscovery work, as would 31% of law firms. 31% of law firms have plans to insource eDiscovery work in the next 3 months, as do 22% of corporations. The Cowen Group’s Quarterly Trends Survey is used by large law firms and corporate legal departments alike for strategic planning to help their long-term technical and human needs. The survey has gained a reputation within the industry for its accuracy due to the high participation rate it receives. The Q1 Critical Trends Results can be accessed here.

For More Information Contact: Bill Potter Director of Market Research william@cowengroup.com

N.J. Ruling on Workplace E-Mail Privacy Sure to Impact Forensics

By: Craig Ball  (EDD Update)

Back in June 2009, I posted about Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, et al., a New Jersey appellate decision that found an expectation of privacy in remnants of an employee’s e-mail with her counsel found on a workplace computer.  This, despite a company policy advising employees that they shouldn’t expect any (okay, not much) privacy.  I thought it a case that would resonate beyond the Garden State.  Now, I’m sure of it… (Read the full article).

With Litigation on the Horizon, Toyota Saga Accelerates Into New Phase

By: Craig Carpenter (INFOcus)

The hits just keep on coming for Toyota Motor Corp, with this week being particularly cruel: first, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) announced Tuesday that they would levy a $16.4 million civil penalty on the car giant – the maximum allowed under federal law – for failing to notify the agency of a “sticky pedal” defect in its cars for at least four months.  According to the NHTSA, Toyota knew of sticky gas pedal problems since at least September, 2009.  Second and adding insult to injury is… (Read the full article)

Controlling Legal Costs – Service Providers Defensible Predictive Coding Will Change The Economics Of eDiscovery In 2010

The Editor interviews Jason Robman, Assistant General Counsel, Recommind.

Editor: Al Driver (Metro Corporate Counsel)

“Editor: Mr. Robman, would you tell our readers some background on yourself and Recommind?

Robman: First, thank you having me. I am Assistant General Counsel at Recommind and oversee the company’s daily legal operations. I have been actively involved with eDiscovery for over 10 years now in various capacities. My first taste of discovery was as a young associate, back when we conducted document review and coding with a clipboard and dust mask, when most of the records were paper and stored in large warehouses. I then moved in-house at Bank of America, where…” (To continue reading)

GlaxoSmithKline Gets Stifled by Privilege Claim

Although over a week old, a federal judge ruled against GSK’s interpretation of the privilege rules.  At question were emails sent to both attorneys and non-attorneys.  GSK claimed the emails should be construed as directed towards the attorney, not to the group as a whole.  Federal Judge Cynthia M. Rufe disagreed, stating that this argument is “inconsistent with the requirement that privileges must be narrowly construed.”

This has a huge affect on the privilege process.  As document review is becoming more and more specialized, firms are not going to get away with marking documents privileged merely because they were sent to a lawyer, or it has a stamp that says “Attorney-Client Privilege” on it.  Privilege reviews will become more and more specialized, something I don’t believe software will be able to compensate for.  You will need a lot of attorneys who can differentiate between privileged and non-privileged material. 

The bulk of document review is looking for key words and not necessarily reading every document word for word.  Privilege will require more substantive reading and more of a specialized knowledge of what makes something privileged.  As I noted before, privilege review will not be so quick to move offshore.  Look for the courts to become stringent on what they will allow defendants to withhold as privileged material.

Boosting Your Knowledge Base

How does one separate herself from the pack?  This is the question we should all be asking ourselves.  This is particularly important in the document review industry.  As a contract attorney, project manager or account executive, you are among a field of many, making it hard to differentiate yourself from the masses.  You have document review experience just like everybody else out there looking for a job. 

Do yourself a favor.  Expand your knowledge base.  Continuously add more tools to your belt.  Document review and managing document review can be trying, and even demoralizing.  Don’t let this discourage you.  Also, do not get complacent when it seems like times are good.  The few fortunate people to be working on a long-term project should be aware of how many people they will be competing against when the project ends.

The great thing is it’s not that hard to gain that extra boost.  If you’re reading this, you’re already taking the first step.  Read blogs.  Blogs are everything for accessible knowledge.  Find sites you like and search blog rolls for more suggestions.  I recommend The Posse List to get started and then search from there.  As you compile a network of sites you like, you will already be learning more about the eDiscovery and LPO world.

Blogs are great, but sometimes only take you so far.  But they can take you right where you want to go.  One place that could be is extra training in different software.  Software companies are starting to give free trainings on their software.  Watch for this trend to continue mightily.  I earlier wrote about my experience going to a free certification class as a reviewer on Catalyst CR.  All I had to do was show up for 3 hours and I got a certicate that I can now list on my resume.  I found this just by reading The Posse List and seeing the breaking news.  I then took the iniative.  Now I did have to travel, which not everybody can do.  So look for webinars for different softwares you find.  TPL listed this a few months ago for the review software Relativity.  Summation also provides online webinars that can further your knowledge base.

And what does this necessarily do?  For me, it’s not only what you’re adding to your toolbox, but the fact that you are adding to your toolbox.  When I look at resumes I want somebody who has an understanding of a wide variety of software systems.  It’s not because I expect this person to go right onto the review without a refresher course or further training.  But I can be sure this person is motivated and has the aptitude to catch-on quickly. 

In sales, this is also a great asset to have.  When talking to potential clients you can honestly say you’ve had experience working on a certain platform.  Make sure you take notes and even read reviews about competing software.  Remember, it’s not how much you know about your own product, but how much you know about your competition that makes you a prepared salesman.  Even go as far to make calls to competitors’ customer service departments to see what they do well, and not so well.

In an industry that is starting to tighten-up, you need to keep yourself marketable.  Always expand your portfolio, and tailor it in the direction in which you would like to go.  Understand how the industry you work in works, and learn the language of that industry.  Nothing will set you apart more than expanding your technical vocabulary.  You’ll be surprised, but the more you sound like you know what you’re talking about, the more you will actually know what you’re talking about.

So don’t waste your internet time surfing obscure stories  (Although this is pretty strange).  But keep refining your portfolio.  You’ve already taken the first step.  Now take another.

EDD Manager: Just Produce It!

When defending a client we all know that, as lawyers, we must act in the best interest of the client.  Of course, in e-discovery, a lot of the times I see things that don’t necessarily benefit the client.  One huge issue I have, as you know if you’ve read this blog before, is the over reviewing of documents.  This is usually due to poor management strategies, with an inability to see the future and how these documents will come back for re-review at some point. 

To continue with poor management strategies, as a manager of an e-discovery project the best thing to do is to be up front with your coders.  Most contract attorneys are not impartial to the litigation at hand – unless they are made to feel that way.  I see a lot of times when a project has started, management does not convey enough about what the actual issues are in the case.  A lot of times a review is tailored so that coders are viewed as automatons to tag documents according to a set protocol – almost as an extension of the computer and software in front of them.  This is not the way to get the most out of your team and is more unproductive than a lot of firms and vendors can imagine.  Here are some helpful hints, that are easy to do, that steer a review into a productive and happy environment instead of into a tense and dreery experience.

1) Give a detailed briefing of the case.  Don’t jump into the coding rules after explaining the litigation for 5 minutes.  Give these attorneys some credit; because that’s what they are – licensed attorneys. 

2) Provide copies of the discovery request.  This should be a no-brainer, but I am shocked how many times I have seen or heard of a bypass of this crucial information.  Let the attorneys read exactly what the other side is looking for.  A lot of times this can shed light on the vagueness of the coding rules.  You’ll find a lot of coders will be able to avoid the “stupid questions”, as well as bring to light the important questions early on in the review.

3) Creat a forum to update the status of review.  Some things are just unknown and we have to accept that.  But there is no reason changes to the review protocol cannot be communicated to the reviewers.  Make sure nothing is merely orally communicated.  When you have meetings, have someone record the minutes and make them available via email or intranet.  Establish an internal network where coders can reference the updated rules and direction of the case.

4) Approach the review with the intent to produce.  This may be the most important caveat here.  A lot of times when policies are reviewed and meetings are held, the focus is on what is to be withheld.  Possibly unbeknownst to the PM, this conveys a concept that withholding documents is of upmost importance.  This couldn’t be further from the truth.  Withholding the correct documents is the most important thing.  Producing everything else is the next most important thing.  In representing your clients you owe them to flood the plaintiff with as many documents as possible.  They requested it, they should get it.  Don’t do their job for them.  A lot of times coders will error on the side of withholding a document because they are unsure of the rules, afraid to produce what seems to be a perfectly harmless document, or just don’t care anymore because they feel isolated from the entire process. 

To recap, inform your employees.  Make them feel a part of the process and not merely as an instrument who can’t think for itself.  Create a forum for them to educate each other, as well as management, and reference the newest information available.  And most of all, convey an ideology of production.  This will cut-down on lit negotiations that can be very tedious, as well as, re-reviews – which can all lead to tension and misery in the workplace.  Next thing you know, you’ve secluded those who can help you the most and possibly divided the office.

A good rule of thumb is a good mind will always trump the newest technology.  A good manager already knows this.

Privilege Review Gets More Complex

Reviews need to get cheaper.  If it’s not going to happen in the good ol’ U-S-of-A it’s going to happen elsewhere – like India.  Does it have the requirements needed?  How about good command of the English language?  Check.  What about a rigorous educational system that will ensure lawyers have great attention to detail?  Check.  What about the ambition, resources and know-how?  Check, Check, and Check.  As data security gets better in the U-S-of-Asia, the LPO industry will continue to command US and UK business.  So once that’s all done, we’ll see the end to onshore, large and mid-scale document reviews?  Not so fast.

Privilege reviews are not necessarily bound for Hindustan just yet.  A few years ago I wouldn’t have thought this way.  Anything that sniffed of privilege – whether a document contained an attorney, had the word “privilege”, or had some unknown scribbling – was marked for privilege review.  So basically this was a terrible filter for determining privileged documents during discovery, but, because of resources, technology, judicial leniency, etc., this was tolerated a little.  Not today.  A few years ago we were reviewing documents from a few years to decades ago.  Electronic discovery at this level it’s at today was not contemplated by the private sector.  Documents weren’t sent to attorneys unless there was a legal issue involved.  Moving forward, I feel pretty sure, you won’t see this kind of diligence. 

What we’re going to see is every document, and it’s mom, sent to an attorney, or contain the language “privileged & confidential” or “attorney-client communication”.  Right now most reviewers are told to mark that privilege and move on.  And yes, there should be a special privilege team reviewing those documents and determining the proper status of such documents.  Unfortunately, we’re going to see an overwhelming amount of these documents tagged for privilege.  Why?  So a company can protect virtually any sensitive document it wants to.

Because of this, there needs to be a clearer understanding of what makes a document privilege.  Is the communication enough?  Or must it be an issue directed at an attorney, where it is within the attorney’s legal and business duty to oversee such an issue?  Whatever it is, you can believe in-house counsel wants their co-workers to be extra careful.  No more whimsical forwarding of possibly privileged, confidential, or any sensitive material without having some indication this document is privileged – even though it might not be.

More privileged reviewers will be needed when this eventually occurs.  And what happens with more reviewers?  Less consistency – especially when the rules are not clearly defined (a problem that infests the document review world.)  But even with rules, there will always be exceptions.  There will always be documents and situations and contexts that won’t be contemplated – where a grey area exists. 

Indian law doesn’t even recognize the communication of a client with in-house counsel as privileged (http://www.sourcingmag.com/content/c061218a.asp).  The cultural understanding makes this the first hurdle.  The next hurdle would be to train these foreign attorneys in understanding how to analyze potentially privileged documents.  The method will become difficult and tedious with the growing intolerance of judges and persistence of plaintiff counsel. 

So while reviews are going to India, I can envision a day where every doc could be possibly privileged.  Ok, maybe not that far, but a lot closer than a trip to India.