Feature Article: Document Review – Practical Advice for Finding the Needle in Your Electronic Document Haystack
	Litigation Minute: Human Versus Machine Translation
	News & Events

Feature Article

Document Review – Practical Advice for Finding the Needle in Your Electronic Document Haystack

The review of electronic documents can become quite cumbersome when done with little planning or foresight. However, if properly planned for and managed, document review can be one of the most valuable aspects of your litigation � resulting in a win for your client upon finding the needle in the electronic document haystack. This article outlines three steps a litigation team should consider before beginning a document review project.

The first step is project scoping. During this phase, you begin with the deadline for production and work backwards to create a timeline and establish key dates. In creating your timeline, you will want to ask how many documents will need to be reviewed and how many can be reviewed per hour. This calculation will give you an estimate of the number of reviews you will need to complete. In most large-scale projects, you may need contract attorneys because you may have insufficient resources in-house. You should also consider your facilities and equipment needs and allow adequate time to test the review environment.

Before the review begins, the team should also give some thought to what the ultimate end product of the review will be. If the goal is just to get documents produced to the other side by the deadline, this analysis may be fairly straightforward. On the other hand, it may be useful to have the reviewers code for particular topics or perhaps look for key documents as they are doing the review. This may save time down the road as some preliminary analysis will have already been completed. However, you will need to consider how this additional coding may impact the speed and accuracy of your review team and determine whether your deadlines allow for it.

The second step in preparing for a document review is training and managing the review team. Once you have determined the number of reviewers and their requisite level of experience, you will be ready to prepare for their training. Training the review team should include an orientation session whereby expectations are set, technical training on the review tool and substantive training on the issues of the case. When considering which review tool your team will use, be sure to consider the types of information the tool can handle. If your case involves documents in languages other than English, be sure your tool can support them. Additionally, if your case involves audio files or if you suspect it may, be sure your tool can support those files as well. Furthermore, consider whether your legal team is interested in using the review tool for additional functionality. For example, some review tools have the ability to produce documents and prepare for depositions, which may make tool selection a no-brainer if your team and case require these features. A final and important consideration is the tool's compatibility with other software you may use in connection with your case.

When training the team on the substantive issues, it is generally a good idea to create a training manual to assist the review team in making consistent determinations. The length of the training manual will vary based on the complexity of the issues and sophistication of the client. It may be helpful to have a third party review your training manual before handing it off to the review team to circumvent unclear statements. This manual should include a brief summary of the case, major documents filed with the court, detailed categorization instructions, privilege name list, key players, an acronym list and the procedural history. You should also include any additional information that will assist the review team in consistently categorizing and marking the documents.

As far as review team management, a manager should be on-site with the reviewers. This allows the manager to answer database questions, distribute documents, maintain an up-to-date question and answer log and decision log, make sure things are running smoothly and make the reviewers feel like part of the team, with direct access to the decision makers. When reviewers are treated as part of the team, their work product is generally better. Furthermore, a sense of teamwork fosters the ability to call upon the reviewers for additional tasks beyond reviewing documents. With their unique understanding of the data, these additional tasks could include witness dossier, whereby the reviewers assist with gathering information prior to a deposition, response to motions and the creation of privilege logs.

The legal team will also want to consider entering into a protective order, clawback agreement or quick peek agreement to prevent the devastating effects of inadvertent production of privileged or confidential information. The review team should establish a plan for dealing with HIPAA information, trade secret information, illegal activity or offensive materials and consider training the review team on those determinations. Inevitably, a large set of documents will contain at least one of these types of information, and it is best to have a plan established ahead of time for how the team will deal with it.

The third step is quality control (QC). Particularly at the beginning of the review, it is helpful to have someone spot-check the reviewer's work to give regular feedback on documents that are being correctly and incorrectly coded. Additionally, prior to any document production, the document review team manager should run systematic procedures to limit mistakes. The managers will also want to assess the completeness of the review, ensuring that no documents were missed and that they were coded consistently and accurately. Additionally, QC should be run on privileged documents to be sure none are inadvertently produced.

By following the steps outlined above, litigation teams can save an incredible amount of time and money in the document review process. Although in some cases document review is merely part of the process, in others it may be the part that leads to victory. In either instance, a planned and well thought-out document review will always be time well spent.

Special thanks to Kara Kirkeby, Kroll Ontrack/TrialGraphix Document Review Services Manager, for her contribution in writing this article. Ms. Kirkeby specializes in large-scale complex litigation e-discovery projects. She can be reached for question or comment at kkirkeby@krollontrack.com.

Litigation Minute

Human Versus Machine Translation

There are multiple legal and technical issues a litigation team will face when involved in litigation across borders. One of the largest issues involves understanding and properly categorizing documents that are not written in the language spoken by the legal team. In this situation, it may be best to have the documents translated from their primary language into the language used by the legal team. For example, if your document set contains documents in German, French and Japanese, and your reviewers are native English speakers, you should consider translating them into English prior to review.

Once you have decided to translate your documents, you are faced with deciding how to go about that task. You can either translate the documents using technology or you can hire a translator fluent in both languages to translate the documents for you. Choosing between machine and human translation is a common dilemma as there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.

There are three main advantages to machine translation: time, money and consistency. Whereas a person requires breaks and generally works about eight hours per day, a computer is able to work around the clock, thereby generally taking less time to translate a set of documents than a person. Furthermore, the cost of translation software over time is much lower than the costs associated with hiring a person. As far as consistency, in computer translation the computer responds to the same set of factors in the same way every time, creating consistent language translations. However, the fact that translation is consistent does not necessarily mean it is correct. In fact, the most commonly cited disadvantage to machine translation is accuracy.

Interestingly, the greatest weakness of machine translation is the greatest strength of human translation: accuracy. Machines are unable to take context into account and are not programmed to understand slang words and phrases. Machines are unable to translate cultural components and they translate very literally, rather than incorporating colloquial terminology. Moreover, machines are unable to solve the vast range of complex rules and ambiguities that exist among the various languages throughout the world. Therefore, human translation tends to more accurately reflect the meaning of the language, especially in cases in which the document set contains informal communications.

The best method of translation will continue to be an issue that must be determined early in the review process. There are definite advantages and disadvantages to both human and computer translations. However, as the technology continues to advance, it may only be a matter of time before machine translation becomes as accurate as human translation and thereby the method of choice.

News & Events

Upcoming Webinar! The Golden Hour: When Every Minute Counts

Take this unique opportunity to hear from the experts during a one hour webinar focused on issues affecting data security in the healthcare industry. Healthcare facilities collect, utilize and maintain the most desirable elements of a patient's confidential information � from personal health data to Social Security numbers and credit card information. In a setting where patients, visitors, volunteers, vendors, staff and others freely visit, a healthcare facility is ripe for information misuse. Additionally, the necessity for collaboration between departments, clinics and practitioners increases the chance of a data loss incident. While it may seem easier to ignore the risk, the risk will not ignore you. This presentation will provide you with practical guidance from experts in preparing for and dealing with a data breach in the healthcare industry. For more information and to register, please visit www.krollontrack.com/redir/feb09Healthweb-ITT.asp.

Kroll Ontrack Offers Redesigned E-Discovery Certification Course for 2009

The industry's legal technology thought leader has revamped its E-Discovery Certification Course for 2009 with updated topics, additional speakers and dual track, customizable sessions to appeal to beginner, intermediate and advanced learners. The redesigned course curriculum is ideal for legal and technical professionals of all levels, including in-house counsel, law firm attorneys, litigation support professionals, paralegals, IT staff and members of the judiciary. For more information and to register for an upcoming course, visit www.krollontrack.com/certification-courses/.

Meet our representatives at the following events:

Visit www.krollontrack.com/upcoming-events/ for more information on these events and others.

Back To Top

We Request Your Input

This newsletter was written by Regina Jytyla and Joni Shogren, Kroll Ontrack staff attorneys, with assistance from Kelly Kubacki and Meridith Socha, Kroll Ontrack Law Clerks. Ms. Shogren can be contacted by writing to jshogren@krollontrack.com.

For more information about electronic discovery and computer forensics services, contact Kroll Ontrack at 800 347 6105 or visit www.krollontrack.com.