Digital Detectives

Discovery, as all lawyers know, is the process of collecting and exchanging information about the court case to prepare for the trial. Traditionally, this was done by many lawyers over countless billable hours in which every page of potential evidence was examined for important information. Because of this, the more information existed in reference to a case, the more expensive the case was. As technology developed, law firms began using computers to do keyword searches and conceptual searches. Unfortunately, there were problems including picking the right keywords or concepts, misspelled words, how to structure the items, and that these searches only yielded 20% of important data. Recently, technology has advanced to predictive coding, or teaching a computer program to think like a lawyer would. But how cost effective and practical is predictive coding, and how well does it actually work? In this episode of The Digital Detectives, Sharon Nelson and John Simek discuss the evolution of technology and case discovery, how predictive coding works and is priced, and examples of cases that have involved predictive coding. Simek first explains the importance of culling, or filtering out unimportant data sets through DeNISTing, deduping, or filtering by dates. He then explains predictive coding in its simplicity: to feed a computer program information based on discovery attorneys have already done until the computer can accurately predict which information is important. Simek and Nelson then go on to examine the prices vendors charge for the predictive coding process and in which cases it might be profitable for the law firm or client. There is a steep, expensive learning curve involved; many mid-sized law firms probably will not profit and even very large cases only save an average of 15% using predictive coding. However, Nelson explains, predictive coding is the future of discovery, so it is important for lawyers to pay attention to when the benefits outweigh the costs. Nelson concludes the podcast by giving examples of when predictive coding has already appeared in court cases. The landmark case was Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe, in which Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck allowed predictive coding to be used as long as the defense and prosecution agree to its use, there are a large volume of documents, it is the superior technology, it is more cost effective, and it is transparent and defensible. Inevitably, the conclusion is that it is not for the judge to micromanage the discovery process. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In 2006, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure rule-makers developed and put into practice amendments dealing with electronically stored information (ESI) and e-discovery. However, most of those involved believed these amendments did not adequately deal with lost or missing ESI or "the spoliation issue." In 2014 the rule-makers proposed Rule 37(e), which deals with the issue of spoliation equally across all federal courts, resolving the issue of inherent authority, or judges making decisions individually for each case. What are these changes and how will they affect the way businesses deal with e-discovery and data preservation? In this episode of The Digital Detectives, Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview ESI preservation expert James Kurz about how Rule 37(e) works and what the consequences are for the future of ESI preservation. Kurz explains that the rule, which only deals with ESI, proposes a three part test before considering spoliation issues: the ESI should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation and is lost, the ESI was lost because the party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve the information, and the missing information cannot be restored or replaced with additional discovery. If this test is passed, the federal court may then impose remedies, or if intention is proved, order more serious sanctions. He explains that Rule 37(e) will make a more homogenous legal process for e-discovery, and will solve some of the controversy surrounding the costs of ESI preservation and e-discovery for businesses. Although the rule faces the Judicial Court, Supreme Court, and then Congress, Kurz believes it will go through and be effective in December 2015. James Kurz is a partner in the Alexandria VA law firm of Redmon, Peyton and Braswell LLP. His practice focuses on business litigation, including computer, software, and communications technologies cases. He also has an emphasis in the challenge of electronic discovery and the issues of information governance and co-wrote the white paper "The Long-Awaited Proposed FRCP Rule 37(e), Its Workings and Its Guidance for ESI Preservation." Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Despite all the attention that e-discovery has received over the last decade, it is still a relatively new part of the litigation process. For those lawyers who were never exposed to e-discovery in law school or their formative years, the systems and products involving data collection and analysis can be overwhelming and complex. How much do lawyers need to know about information governance, data collection, data analysis, managed document review, and electronically stored information (ESI)? Alternately, for those data collection practitioners who are already intricately involved in the culling and analysis, how is the technology and process changing? In this episode of Digital Detectives, Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview e-discovery solutions expert Aaron Lawlor about what is involved with ESI and data collection, current trends in data analysis, and future advances in technology and process. Lawlor urges every litigator to become experienced with the state and federal rules involving e-discovery in order to better serve their clients. He explains the process of research and documentation of key players in the case, and then collecting, analyzing, and refining any relevant information before presenting to the counsel. In order to facilitate this process, lawyers and data collectors narrow the data set early by a process of visualizing connections and communication mapping. It is important, Lawlor says, for every lawyer to become familiar with e-discovery and data collection, since it is an increasingly important source of information. Aaron Lawlor is the senior director of Global Legal Solutions at UnitedLex Corporation. He has spent the past decade addressing his clients' e-discovery needs, first as an attorney at Am Law 100 firm, then as the cofounder of a boutique consulting and managed document review company. His company was acquired by UnitedLex in 2013 and, in his current role, he partners with in-house and outside council to implement value-driven e-discovery solutions. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Every law firm can run into incidents of employee misconduct, data breaches, and intellectual property theft. In the age of modern technology, data breaches, insider trading, and other security problems require extensive technological forensics. Partners and firm owners, as well as lawyers working within the firm, need to understand why a digital investigation is needed, what steps should be taken within an investigation, and who should be involved. Having this knowledge can save the firm thousands of dollars while uncovering the truth. In this episode of Digital Detectives, Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview ediscovery and compliance attorney Patrick Oot about how attorneys should be prepared on technology issues when they start to investigate criminal and civil matters. Everyone leaves technology footprints, Oot explains. Whether dealing with an internal investigation or with client data, the most important asset is unbiased, comprehensive, and well documented research. When hiring a digital investigator, the firm should always find an outside expert who is experienced with data breaches, understands how data moves through the system, and can manage proper narrative to the regulators. Properly conducting a digital investigation can make the difference in the credibility and success of a law firm. Patrick Oot is a partner in the DC office of Shook Harty and Bacon LLC where he leads the practice on e compliance and digital investigations. He is one of the few ediscovery and compliance attorneys in the nation that possesses the tripartite experience of an in-house corporate counsel from a fortune 16 organization, a senior attorney at a federal regulatory agency, and a partner in a large law firm. Patrick has extensive experience advising on discovery and investigative matters involving commercial litigation, compliance, regulatory requests, antitrust matters, and personnel issues. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All lawyers have an ethical obligation to employ security measures when sharing information and data with their clients. Whether that means encrypting all important emails or properly researching cloud based file-sharing services like Dropbox, it is incumbent on lawyers to understand the levels of security available. LexisNexis recently did a survey on what tools lawyers and legal professionals are using to protect their clients' privileged information. 77% of the lawyers surveyed did not have adequate security for their confidential client data. How important is encryption and what can lawyers do to change the way they share data? On this episode of Digital Detectives, Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview Bob Ambrogi, a lawyer and journalist who recently wrote about the LexisNexis survey. They ask him about the implications of the survey, what security measures lawyers should be taking, how frequently clients are hurt by lack of security, and why lawyers are generally resistant to learning about data encryption. Ambrogi explains that an overall lack of information, ignored ethics rulings, lack of time, and assumed difficulty are the reasons lawyers often refuse to learn how to safely share data. He encourages lawyers, especially the ones in small or solo firms, to seek out a consultant to learn about the relatively easy encryption tools and techniques. After all, no lawyer wants to be a part of the 77%. Bob Ambrogi is a Massachusetts lawyer and journalist and has covered legal technology and the Internet for two decades. He writes the "Ambrogi on Tech" column for the ABA Journal and his blog LawSites, launched in 2002, is in the ABA Journal Blawg 100 Hall of Fame. Since 2005, he has co-hosted the legal-affairs podcast Lawyer 2 Lawyer also on the Legal Talk Network. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On February 12th of 2008, the FBI announced that it had hired Lockheed Martin to build its Next Generation Identification system (NGI) to deploy multimodal matching to biometric data of US citizens. Today, NGI's database contains several types of unique identifiers including fingerprints, iris prints, and facial recognition. On this episode of Digital Detectives, hosts Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview Jennifer Lynch from the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Together they discuss false identifications, mandatory background checks, and the First Amendment right to be anonymous. Tune in to learn more about EFF's FOIA request and how the FBI is using the data of the innocent to look for guilty parties. Jennifer Lynch is a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to defending civil liberties in the digital world. At EFF, Jennifer works on privacy issues in new technologies such as biometrics, domestic drones, and location tracking devices. She successfully sued the Federal Aviation Administration and Customs and Border Protection to obtain thousands of pages of previously unpublished drone records and has testified about facial recognition and its Fourth Amendment implications before the Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Some experts believe that, in addition to being prohibitively expensive for law firms to manage, maintaining immense amounts of client data increases the probability that it will be exposed to the public through a security breach or hack. That is why many like-minded firms are outsourcing data management to companies that specialize in it. On this episode of Digital Detectives, hosts Sharon Nelson and John Simek interview Ralph C. Losey from Jackson Lewis P.C. Together, they discuss how to manage large amounts of data, when to outsource, and what to do with unprocessed information. Tune in to learn more about dark data, how to select outside vendors, and hosting costs vs. storage costs. Ralph C. Losey is a shareholder of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm specializing in labor and employment law with over 52 offices nationwide and 800 attorneys. Ralph serves as the firm's National e-Discovery Counsel in charge of electronic discovery issues. Ralph has limited his practice to e-discovery since 2006 and is the author of five books on e-discovery law and multiple law review articles. Ralph is also co-founder of the IT-Lex foundation and the Electronic Discovery Best Practices group, and the developer of an online training course in e-discovery, e-DiscoveryTeamTraining.com. Ralph is a frequent speaker at e-discovery conferences worldwide and a leading contributor in the field of Legal Search. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Some technology experts believe it's not a matter of if law firm communications can be hacked, but when. With continuing reports of the NSA and foreign entities monitoring the privileged attorney-client communications of US law firms, lawyers may be required to take additional measures to protect client information. On this edition of Digital Detectives, hosts Sharon Nelson and John Simek discuss the growing dangers and evolving duties for clients and attorneys with cyber security expert David Ries from Clark Hill Thorp Reed. Among the many changes to legal practice are alterations to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, increased contractual expectations from clients, and a growing need to encrypt portable devices. Tune in to learn more about these developing areas of attorney responsibility. David Ries is a member in the Pittsburgh office of Clark Hill Thorp Reed, LLP where he practices in the areas of environmental, commercial, and technology law and litigation. He regularly deals with privacy and security issues in his practice and frequently writes and speaks on them for legal, professional, and academic groups. Special thanks to our sponsor, Digital WarRoom. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From malware and hackers to BYOD and TYOD, the biggest threat to law firm data could be the attorneys themselves. On this episode of Digital Detectives, hosts Sharon D. Nelson and John W. Simek interview data expert Ben M. Schorr and discover complex new threats to data security and the simplest solutions to reduce them. Schorr is a technologist and Chief Executive Officer for Roland Schorr and Tower, a professional consulting firm headquartered in Flagstaff, Arizona with offices in Hawaii and Oregon. He is also the author of several books and articles on technology, including The Lawyer's Guide to Microsoft Outlook, The Lawyer's Guide to Microsoft Word, and Microsoft OneNote in One Hour for Lawyers. He's been a Microsoft MVP for more than 15 years and involved with management and technology for more than 20 years. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this edition of Digital Detectives hosts Sharon D. Nelson and John W. Simek invite Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration to discuss Information Governance as it relates to e-discovery, privacy, record keeping and security. Baron connects the dots between all these areas and helps lawyers understand they need to know about information governance and the current trends he is see in this area. Baron serves as counsel to the Information Governance and E-Discovery Practice Group at the law firm of Drinker Biddle and Reath, in Washington, DC. His prior career in the federal service included acting as trial lawyer and senior counsel at the Department of Justice, and for the past 13 years as director of litigation at the US National Archives and Records Administration. He is an internationally recognized speaker on the subject of electronic records. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices