Sign up to receive eDiscovery Daily's articles via email or add the RSS feed to your newsreader of choice.
Browse eDiscovery Daily Blog
Brad Jenkins, President and CEO of CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years of experience leading customer focused companies in the litigation support arena. Brad has authored many articles on litigation support issues, and has spoken before national audiences on document management practices and solutions.
Doug Austin, Professional Services Manager for CloudNine Discovery, has over 20 years experience providing legal technology consulting and technical project management services to numerous commercial and government clients. Doug has also authored several articles on eDiscovery best practices.
Jane Gennarelli is a principal of Magellan’s Law Corporation and has been assisting litigators in effectively handling discovery materials for over 30 years. She authored the company’s Best Practices in a Box™ content product and assists firms in applying technology to document handling tasks. She is a known expert and often does webinars and presentations for litigation support professionals around the country. Jane can be reached by email at jane@litigationbestpractices.com.
May 10, 2013
Yesterday, we discussed some general observations from the Annual Meeting for the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) group and discussed some significant efforts and accomplishments by the (suddenly heavily talked about) EDRM Data Set project. Here are some updates from other projects within EDRM.
Read moreMay 09, 2013
The Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) Project was created in May 2005 by George Socha of Socha Consulting LLC and Tom Gelbmann of Gelbmann & Associates to address the lack of standards and guidelines in the electronic discovery market. Now, beginning its ninth year of operation with its annual meeting in St. Paul, MN, EDRM is accomplishing more than ever to address those needs. Here are some highlights from the meeting, and an update regarding the (suddenly heavily talked about) EDRM Data Set project.
Read moreMay 07, 2013
As we discussed recently in this blog, Microsoft® Outlook emails can take many forms. One of those forms is the MSG file extension, which is used to represent a self-contained unit for an individual message “family” (email and its attachments). MSG files can exist on your computer in the same folders as Word, Excel and other data files. But, when it comes to deduping those MSG files, the approach to do so is typically different.
Read moreApril 15, 2013
As reported by IT-Lex, the Second Circuit of the US Court of Appeals rejected the Plaintiff’s request for a writ of mandamus recusing Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck from Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe SA.
Read moreApril 05, 2013
In Amana Society, Inc. v. Excel Engineering, Inc., Iowa District Judge Linda R. Reade found that “scanning [to TIFF format] for Summation purposes qualifies as ‘making copies of materials’ and that these costs are recoverable”.
Read moreApril 01, 2013
Thursday, we covered the first four tips from Craig Ball’s informative post on his blog (Ball in your Court) entitled Eight Tips to Quash the Cost of E-Discovery with tips on saving eDiscovery costs. Today, we’ll discuss the last four tips.
Read moreMarch 28, 2013
By now, Craig Ball needs no introduction our readers as he has been a thought leader interview participant for the past three years. I’m a regular reader of his blog, Ball in your Court and, last week, he published a very informative post entitled Eight Tips to Quash the Cost of E-Discovery with tips on saving eDiscovery costs. I thought we would cover those tips here, with some commentary.
Read moreMarch 21, 2013
Thirty months ago yesterday, eDiscovery Daily was launched. It’s hard to believe that it has been 2 1/2 years since our first three posts that debuted on our first day. 635 posts later, a lot has happened in the industry that we’ve covered. And, yes we’re still crazy after all these years for committing to a daily post each business day, but we still haven’t missed a business day yet. Twice a year, we like to take a look back at some of the important stories and topics during that time. So, here are just a few of the posts over the last six months you may have missed. Enjoy!
Read moreMarch 08, 2013
Today’s thought leader is Craig Ball. A frequent court appointed special master in electronic evidence, Craig is a prolific contributor to continuing legal and professional education programs throughout the United States, having delivered over 1,000 presentations and papers. Craig’s articles on forensic technology and electronic discovery frequently appear in the national media, and he writes a monthly column on computer forensics and eDiscovery for Law Technology News called Ball in your Court, as well as blogs on those topics at ballinyourcourt.com.
Read moreMarch 07, 2013
Today’s thought leader is Craig Ball. A frequent court appointed special master in electronic evidence, Craig is a prolific contributor to continuing legal and professional education programs throughout the United States, having delivered over 1,000 presentations and papers. Craig’s articles on forensic technology and electronic discovery frequently appear in the national media, and he writes a monthly column on computer forensics and eDiscovery for Law Technology News called Ball in your Court, as well as blogs on those topics at ballinyourcourt.com.
Read moreMarch 06, 2013
Today’s thought leader is Craig Ball. A frequent court appointed special master in electronic evidence, Craig is a prolific contributor to continuing legal and professional education programs throughout the United States, having delivered over 1,000 presentations and papers. Craig’s articles on forensic technology and electronic discovery frequently appear in the national media, and he writes a monthly column on computer forensics and eDiscovery for Law Technology News called Ball in your Court, as well as blogs on those topics at ballinyourcourt.com.
Read moreJanuary 23, 2013
In the last couple of posts in this series we covered the first phases of the Electronic Discovery Reference Model – Information Management, Identification and Preservation – and we focused on these tasks from the perspective of the litigators. The next two phases – Collection and Processing – are technical in nature and typically not handled directly by attorneys (attorneys should, however, be involved in making decisions regarding how this work will be done and in monitoring the status of this work).
Read moreJanuary 03, 2013
In an earlier post in this series, we talked about the vehicles of discovery – that is, the mechanisms by which parties exchange information. One of the mechanisms we discussed is Document Production, which is the exchange of relevant documents between the parties. This step is usually the most time-consuming and expensive part of discovery. In fact, it’s often the most time-consuming and expensive part of a lawsuit. It has always been a significant task, but since eDiscovery has come into the picture, it has grown by magnitudes.
Read moreNovember 12, 2012
It seems like ages ago when New York Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck denied the motion of the plaintiffs in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe & MSL Group to recuse himself in the case. It was all the way back in June. Now, District Court Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. has ruled on the plaintiff’s recusal request.
Read moreOctober 02, 2012
A couple of months ago, we published a post discussing how the number of pages in each gigabyte can vary widely and, to help illustrate the concept, we took one of our blog posts and put it into several different file formats to illustrate how each file had the same content, yet was a different size. That’s not the only concept that example illustrates.
Read moreSeptember 20, 2012
It’s hard to believe that it has been two years ago today since we launched the eDiscoveryDaily blog. Now that we’ve hit the “terrible twos”, is the blog going to start going off on rants about various eDiscovery topics, like Will McAvoy in The Newsroom? Maybe. Or maybe not. Wouldn’t that be fun! Here are some highlights from the past six months.
Read moreSeptember 18, 2012
Yesterday, we wrote about tracking file counts from collection to production, the concept of expanded file counts, and the categorization of files during processing. Today, let’s walk through a scenario to show how the files collected are accounted for during the discovery process.
Read moreSeptember 17, 2012
Previously, we wrote about Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) in the eDiscovery process. Both are important in improving the quality of work product and making the eDiscovery process more defensible overall. For example, in attorney review, QA mechanisms include validation rules to ensure that entries are recorded correctly while QC mechanisms include a second review (usually by a review supervisor or senior attorney) to ensure that documents are being categorized correctly. Another overall QC mechanism is tracking of document counts through the discovery process, especially from collection to production, to identify how every collected file was handled and why each non-produced document was not produced.
Read moreSeptember 11, 2012
We like to believe that there will never be any problems with the data that we preserve, collect and process for eDiscovery purposes. Sometimes, however, critical data may be difficult or impossible to use. Perhaps key files are password protected from being opened and the only way to open them is to “crack” the password. Or, perhaps a key file may be corrupted. If that file is an Outlook Personal Storage Table (PST) file, that file corruption could literally make tens of thousands of documents unavailable for discovery unless the file can be repaired.
Read moreSeptember 05, 2012
This blog series is aimed at helping you to move into an eDiscovery consultant role in a law firm. We’ve covered the advantages to doing so, transitioning into a consulting role, and tips for being an effective consultant. In the last posts in the series, I’m going to discuss opportunities to provide consulting services in a typical case. And, I’ll use the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) as a guide through potential consulting tasks.
Read moreAugust 30, 2012
One thing about being a daily blog is that the posts accumulate more quickly. As a result, I’m happy to announce that today is our 500th post on eDiscoveryDaily! In less than two years of existence! So, what have we covered over the first 499 posts?
Read moreAugust 14, 2012
So, you’re facing litigation and you need help from an outside provider to “get your ducks in a row” to understand how much data you have, how many documents have hits on key terms and estimate the costs to process, review and produce the data so that you’re in the best position to negotiate appropriate terms at the Rule 26(f) conference (aka, meet and confer). But, how much does it cost to do all that? It shouldn’t be expensive. In fact, it could even be free.
Read more
CloudNine Discovery provides specialized national litigation support services focusing on technology in electronic discovery, computer forensics document imaging and online document review. Our nationwide litigation services company has offices in Houston, Texas.
Leaders in Litigation Support Software Services
get social with us NOW: 
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and in no way indicative of the views held by CloudNine Discovery. No representation is made as to whether the information provided is the most current available. This blog/Web site is made available by the contributors solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. The blog/Web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.
