So far in this blog series, we’ve taken a look at the ‘litigation support culture’ circa 1980, and we’ve covered how databases were built and used. In the past couple of weeks we’ve talked about the form in which document collections were stored and the evolution – first in paper form, then on microfilm, then microfiche, and then as digital images. Database content has evolved too. Let's discuss.
So far in this blog series, we’ve taken a look at the ‘litigation support culture’ circa 1980, and we’ve covered how databases were built and used. We’ve come a long way since then, and in last week’s blog, we started discussing how things have evolved, beginning with a discussion of the use of microfilm and microfiche to store document collections. As most of you know, the next step in the evolution process was a move to storing documents as images.
So far in this blog series, we’ve taken a look at the ‘litigation support culture’ circa 1980, and we’ve covered how databases were built and used. We’ve come a long way since then, and in the next posts I’m going to talk a bit about how things evolved. One of the first big changes in how we worked was the use of microfilm.
So far in this blog series, we’ve taken a look at the ‘litigation support culture’ in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, we’ve covered how databases were built, and we started discussing how databases were used. We’re going to continue that in this post by discussing the workflow for searching and selecting documents for review.
If you have worked in litigation support for a number of years like I have, you start to assemble a toolkit of applications that help you get your job done more quickly and efficiently. In her excellent Litigation Support Guru blog, Amy Bowser-Rollins has recently published a series of posts that describe tools of the trade that she recommends to litigation support “newbies”. Let’s take a look.
So far in this blog series, we’ve taken a look at the ‘litigation support culture’ in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, and we’ve covered how a database was built. We’re going to move on to discuss how those databases were used. The picture above is of a Texas Instruments Silent 700 terminal – which was the standard for use by litigators. This photo was taken at the Texas State Historical Museum.
In the last couple of Throwback Thursday posts we covered the first stages in a database-building project (circa 1980), including designing and planning a database, preparing for a project, establishing an archive, coding and qc, and production status record keeping. The next steps are described here.
The Throwback Thursday blog two weeks ago included discussion of the first stages in a database-building project (circa 1980), including designing and planning a database, and preparing for a project. The next steps are described here.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, very few law firms had internal litigation support resources: firms did not have litigation support staff or technology. Up until 1985, most litigation teams relied on vendor services and tools, and more often than not litigation team attorneys were directly involved in working with vendors to design and build databases. In the next few blog posts, I’m going to describe a typical project and how things worked back in the early 1980s.
Want to be better equipped to speak the “lingo” of eDiscovery and understand what you’re saying? Here’s a glossary that can help.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the business world looked very different than it does today, and the field of litigation support looked very different than it does today. Let me paint a picture for you…
Cheryl Garner is the Practice Support Manager at Manning & Kass, Ellrod, Ramirez, Trester LLP – a 150 attorney law firm with six offices in the U.S. Cheryl is located in the firm’s main office in Los Angeles, but has firm-wide responsibility. She joined the firm in December 2012, after a long and diverse career in the legal field.
In 1978, I took my first job in litigation, with the law department of a Fortune 100 corporation headquartered in New York City. I was one of a team assembled to collect responsive documents to be produced in a major antitrust litigation. The documents were located in the corporation’s office and warehouse facilities around the country. While the process of collecting documents varied from case to case, this project was representative of the general approach to collecting documents in large-scale litigation. Let me describe how it worked.
Back before desktops, laptops and tablets, the business world meant paper. Lots of paper. And that meant that litigation preparation activities revolved around paper. Here's how the phases of discovery were handled, prior to the early 1980s.
I was recently teaching a project management class at a large law firm, and a student mentioned that he was working on a case that involved a very old document collection, some of which only existed on microfiche. He asked me for advice on managing the conversion of those documents and incorporating them into his bigger-picture project.
Gordon Moffat is the LPM Director of eDiscovery and Litigation Support Projects at Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC – a large law firm with 21 offices located throughout the U.S. Gordon is located in Nashville, Tennessee, but has firm-wide responsibility for Litigation Support and eDiscovery projects. Gordon has been with Baker Donelson since 2007.
Angie Gossen is the Director of Client Services at CloudNine Discovery, an eDiscovery and technology service provider that offers an online review tool (OnDemand®), and the sponsor of this eDiscovery Daily blog. Angie brings a world of experience to CloudNine – experience from the ‘other side of the fence’: she spent most of her career as ‘the client’.
Julie Brown is the Litigation Technology Manager at Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, a large law firm with seven offices in Ohio, Texas, Pennsylvania and Washington D.C. Julie is located in the firm’s main office in Columbus, OH.
Dawn Radcliffe is the Discovery Manager at TransCanada Pipelines, Ltd., a leader in the development and operation of North American energy infrastructure and one of the continent’s largest providers of gas storage and related services. TransCanada has offices throughout Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. Dawn is located in the Houston office, and has been with TransCanada for a little over three years.
Mark Lieb is a litigation support professional at Leydig, Voit & Mayer, LTD, an Intellectual Property law firm with U.S.offices in Chicago, the San Francisco Bay area, Washington D.C., and an office in Frankfurt, Germany. Mark and one other litigation support professional support the more than 60 attorneys who practice intellectual property litigation at Leydig. He has been with the firm for over three years.
Browse eDiscovery Daily Blog