Why is it important to master the document review process?

Document review, in the context of litigation and legal proceedings, is the process by which each party to the proceeding examines, sorts, and analyses all documents, data, and electronic information in their possession to determine which materials are relevant to the proceeding and which should be withheld from production. Most discovery and ediscovery actions are built around this procedure.

If a party decides that the information is protected from production during their study, they can file a log with the court (a brief description of the document and the grounds for withholding) and be given relief from release to the opposing party.

Players in the Legal Document Review Analysis

An attorney usually conducts and oversees the document review process. Due to their capacity to actively assess data against the facts of the case and make conclusions on how the documents should be categorized, attorneys have been the chosen reviewers. An attorney assigned with document review must be able to interact with electronic databases, grasp concealed data, and be extremely organized in order to guarantee a thorough examination and subsequent redaction if needed.

Furthermore, the procedure is multidimensional.

Several stages of review, redaction, coding, marking, recording, and preservation into a searchable format are typically required.

Due to the lengthy nature of the procedure and a need to save money, corporations and businesses sometimes outsource document review to contracting attorneys or hire a team of solicitors who are supervised by an attorney.

Even with these cost-cutting techniques in place, the best approach to save money in your document review process, especially if you have a big number of papers to examine, is to use an automated document review system.

What Kinds of Documents Are Prohibited From Being Disclosed?

You will be obliged to submit a suitable document description whenever a document is withheld, which effectively explains why you feel the material is protected.

There are various reasons why a party may be allowed to keep documents during legal proceedings, and each one needs a comprehensive examination to verify that your party's choice to withhold may be justified in a court of law. The most common reasons are listed below.

Relevance

During the discovery process, the opposing side frequently casts a wide net seeking information. Their goal is to collect as much information as possible in order to determine:

If there is something they don't already know, and 2. If there's any paperwork that can support or aid their case approach.

These fishing efforts, on the other hand, may result in demands that have no relevance on the case's claims.

This kind of information is useless.

According to FRCP 26(b), there is no justification to go beyond the regular scope of discovery to give documents that are extraneous to the facts of the claim, litigation, or inquiry, and the producing party has the right to oppose to production.

As a result, scanning for relevance in your document review process is critical for preventing unnecessary production costs and unintended information leakage.

Transient response

It's critical to conduct a comprehensive search for documents that are relevant to the request, not only to guarantee compliance with civil procedural standards, but also to help your own counsel understand and prove your point in the matter.

Failure to review and deliver responsive papers as needed might have serious consequences. The defendant in Nachurs Alpine Sols., Corp. v. Banks presented a log of over 24,000 documents that they opted to suppress as non-responsive. The plaintiff used the log to petition the court to order the defendant to re-examine all of the papers that had been suppressed, this time using four categories that the plaintiff thought were significant. The defendant claimed that the re-review request was too onerous, and that the material requested might be obtained through other means such as depositions and written discovery.

The court ordered the defendant to submit all 24,000 papers for "defense attorneys eyes only" inspection, although Plaintiff's counsel would have to pay for the review.

The plaintiff might seek penalties from the court if the review revealed any papers that had been wrongfully concealed.

A thorough evaluation of documents is required to accurately provide those that are responsive and to properly withhold those that are not.

Privilege

Documents related to attorney consultations or meetings in preparation for trial or hearings are frequently found in litigation and judicial processes. These records are usually protected by attorney-client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine, and can be excluded from public disclosure.

Your document review should focus on language suggesting that legal advice was solicited, offered, or discussed if a document is being withheld under the attorney-client privilege. It should also consider who is interacting with whom and whether or not they are attorneys. If the work-product doctrine protects a document, seek for papers created in preparation of litigation or as part of an internal inquiry of the case's allegations.

Confidential and proprietary information

If a document is classified as secret or includes proprietary information, it may be withheld from public release or need extensive redaction. You are not needed to create a document that details your company's trade secret, such as a trademark food item's recipe or a unique software formula. The document reviewer should look over the document to see if it contains any sensitive or proprietary information, and if so, if redaction will be enough to safeguard it. If redaction is insufficient to prevent publication, the document should be withheld entirely.

Duplicates

Early in the eDiscovery process, removing duplicates can save time and money by reducing review and production time and expenses. It also decreases the risk of uneven reaction and/or unintentional exposure via identical materials.

Duplication of discovery to gather the same material that is unreasonable in terms of difficulty or expense should be avoided, according to the Illinois Supreme Court.

While there are times when it's appropriate to use several sorts of discovery processes to get answers to the same or related issues, time-wasting duplication should be avoided.

The necessity of thoroughly reviewing each document and organizing the contents of each document cannot be overstated. If more discovery is sought, having a complete overview of all documents supplied, including those already produced, may save time and money while also allowing you to confidently explain to the judge why the extra papers are not being produced.

Overburdening

As we discussed before in our discussion of relevance, a party will frequently cast a broad net and seek any and all material in the hopes of finding something that can assist them in their case. While this is usual and expected in most cases, it has its limitations. A party may submit a discovery request that has an extremely low chance of yielding meaningful information.

This is compounded whenever the request takes a large amount of time and money to fulfill. For example, if the opposing party requested all customer information from 2000 to 2020, but their client only used your services in 2008, this would be an excessively demanding request. It would take a long time and a lot of money to create, and it's quite improbable that the records would contain information from any year other than 2008.

Making Your Legal Document Review Analysis Process Easier

Document review, while time-consuming, has certain advantages. A thorough examination of all relevant records and papers aids your lawyer in comprehending the facts of the claim, identifying key parties, and determining potential liability.

However, the entire procedure is time-consuming and pricey. Ediscovery can pay up to 80% of the total case costs.

Thankfully, Legal Document Review analysis software may make the job of reviewing documents for relevance, responsiveness, privilege, duplication, and even redaction much easier.

The quantity of papers that need to be reviewed by a person can be reduced to a fraction of what is routinely handled in a traditional, manual review procedure, saving you time and money. Automation can also aid in the implementation of coding methods to assist in determining which privileges or withholding grounds may apply, preventing erroneous disclosures owing to human mistakes and inconsistencies.