22 Hilton[1] - Electronically Stored Information(ESI Thomas...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Thomas Hilton Comments and opinions expressed by the speaker do not necessarily reflect the positions, opinions or beliefs of the AICPA and should not be construed or interpreted as such. Speakers retain the copyright for all of the following materials. Any replication without written consent is unlawful. Session 22 AICPA NATIONAL FORENSIC ACCOUNTING CONFERENCE Emerging Issues in Electronic Discovery AICPA National Forensic Conference In recent years, the electronic record has replaced the paper document and likewise, a multitude of storage medium from backup tapes to separate servers has replaced the file cabinet The revised FRCP, which became effective December 1, 2006 have placed ESI on a par with paper documents Unlike paper documents where evidence of physical tampering is readily apparent, changes to ESI can go virtually undetected The world of one original has given way to a world in which every document can appear to be an original Is there such a thing as an original anymore? The fact that changes to ESI can be undetectable creates significant problems for the forensic accounting expert If the electronic information provided to and relied upon by the expert cannot be authenticated, are the expert’s opinions built on sand? If such ESI does not meet the authenticity standards or the Federal Rules of Evidence, will the court allow it to be admitted at trial? What’s an expert to do? Information is fundamental to the legal system Information is used to assist the trier of fact in getting to the truth Information is used by testifying experts as a basis upon which to form an opinion The fact that the volume of information in electronic form has multiplied exponentially in recent years has created a landscape that has stressed the legal system, due to what several authors have termed “information inflation”. Consider the article, Information Inflation: Can the Legal System Adapt? By George Paul and Jason Baron A new Information Ecosystem is emerging The quantity of information humankind can create is unlimited Couple this with the fact that, as the ability to create and store massive amounts of ESI mushrooms, the cost to store that information plummets In 1990, a typical gigabyte of storage cost about $20,000; today it costs less than $1 As a result, businesses are receiving and storing more and more data, which means more information must be collected, considered, reviewed, and produced in litigation. With billing rates for junior associates at top law firms at $200/hour, the cost to manually review one gigabyte of data can easily exceed $30,000. These economic realities: i.e. the huge cost differential between the $1 to store a gigabyte of data and $30,000 to review it, acts as a driver in changing traditional attitudes and approaches about how to search for relevant evidence during discovery. 22-1 Since the current forecast is for this inflationary period to continue, the future is almost incomprehensible Impact on the legal system The 98% rule - several studies estimate that 98% of all records are ESI 98% of all federal court cases settle Settlement occurs after discovery, when the parties assess their relative positions and the strengths and weaknesses of the case Consequently, the vast majority of litigation costs are for discovery Litigators are really discovery lawyers and settlement negotiators Discovery is the key task of litigation The FRCP have never expressly imposed an affirmative duty to cooperate within what is otherwise an adversarial process Many cases will require new ways of thinking about computer assisted information retrieval techniques Litigators and experts alike have to be satisfied with retrieving some of the relevant evidence To review every document as was done in the days of paper documents, is virtually impossible and would be cost prohibitive Consequently, new search technologies and software will need to be employed to get a better handle on the size of the haystack and the number of needles that are contained within Panelists at the ABA’s National Conference on E- Discovery reported an increasing trend in legal practice: that of national e-discovery counsel. One attorney or law firm serves as a corporation’s national counsel to handle or supervise the electronic discovery aspects of all of its cases around the country. The corporation’s various local counsel handle all other aspects of the case. Panelists agreed this made sense in view of the tremendous time and effort it takes for an attorney to learn the complexities of today’s typical IT environment. Panelists agreed this was an emerging legal specialty for which younger lawyers are particularly suited given their familiarity with new technologies and the fact that the revised FRCP are still relatively new. May apply mainly to large companies now but all will be faced with these issues on a few years Search techniques With the exponential increase in the volume of data subject to e-discovery, lawyers have begun to employ automated search tools to manage the discovery process. One example of this is “de-duplication” software which is used to find duplicate electronic files since ESI often consists of a massively redundant universe (e.g. e-mail) Increasingly, “near de-duplication” tools are also being used to assist in organizing and expediting overall document reviews even if the technique is not used to reduce the actual number of unique documents subject to review 22-2 The most commonly used search methodology today has been the “keyword” search, which refers to set-based searching using simple words or word combinations with or without Boolean or related operators (and, or, and not, but not) Keyword searches work best when the legal inquiry is focused on finding particular documents and when the use of language is relatively predictable (e.g. specific individual or date, regardless of context) Since information identified in a keyword search is regardless of context, information is captured that is irrelevant to the user’s query due to the ambiguity of language. On the other hand, keyword searches have the potential to miss documents that have the same meaning as the term used in the query but is not specified More advanced keyword searches using “Boolean” operators and techniques borrowed from “fuzzy logic” may increase the number of relevant documents and decrease the number of irrelevant documents retrieved Attorneys have begun to utilize advanced search techniques such as concept searching, which relies on semantic relations between words and/or which use “thesauri” to capture documents that might be missed in keyword searches. Concept searches attempt to locate information that relates to a desired concept without the presence of a particular word or phrase Case in point: Disability Rights Council of Greater Washington v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 2007 WL 1585452 (D.D.C. June I, 2007) The plaintiff simple keyword of e-mail by person’s names, but the Judge (Facciola) suggested the parties consider concept searching instead. Judge Facciola’s opinion includes the following: “I bring to the parties’ attention recent scholarship that argues that concept searching, as opposed to keyword searching, is more efficient and more likely to produce the most comprehensive results. See George L. Paul & Jason Baron, Information Inflation: Can the Legal System Adapt? 13 Rich. J.L. & Tech.10 (2007) See also, The Sedona Conference Best Practices Commentary on the Use of Search and Retrieval Methods in E-Discovery (August, 2007) E-Discovery Process The EDRM Project Team, which consists of 62 organizations representing electronic discovery service providers, corporations, law firms, and professional organizations have developed a model to overview the entire e-discovery process from an organizational perspective The work product of this group is known as the “Electronic Discovery Reference Model” and found at http://www.edrm.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page The model is widely accepted and employed by most e-discovery specialists 22-3 Steps in the EDRM Model (go to chart first and identify each step) Records Management The company establishes (or refines) an Internal Discovery Preparedness & Response Team The team is comprised of one or more outside attorneys or other experts in the ediscovery field to serve as coach and trainer Other members include people from the client’s law department, IT department, key business units and record management departments Outside e-discovery experts assist in the articulation of the initial tasks of the team which typically are: Identify and retain any outside experts and e-discovery vendors necessary to meet the client’s needs Meet with IT and records personnel to perform complete inventory of client’s electronic data and understand the life cycle of the client’s overall IT architecture and computer systems Prepare a complete network and data location map and consider possible technology re-designs to facilitate preservation and production, including e-mail filtering and document archiving systems Prepare a form affidavit regarding computer systems and data, costs, and inaccessibility Establish or refine standard litigation hold procedures Totally re-write the existing Records Management Policy Manual addressing the issues of duplicate management, metadata, storage and distribution Analyze and where appropriate, implement a Rule 37(f) Safe Harbor Destruction Program in accordance with a record life cycle desired by the company and in compliance with governing law Identification Usually triggered by lawsuit, subpoena or in anticipation of a dispute Begin with a study of the complaint, dispute or government investigation Evaluate the scope of the electronic and paper data that may fall within the discovery requirements of the dispute including initial disclosure and any outstanding discovery requests, retention letters or orders. Identify key witnesses, all sources of discoverable data, including distributed data or third-party data still owned or under the control of the company Categorize irrelevant data sets by degree of accessibility, such as live, readyarchival, and backup. Prepare for meet and confer session with opposing counsel and the court Preservation ESI identified needs to be preserved and protected against destruction or alteration Prepare and circulate a Litigation Hold written communication which should come from senior management or in-house legal counsel Implement litigation holds by automated process where feasible by utilizing system wide key word searches or concept searches 22-4 Calendar backup deletion schedules and place holds where appropriate Suspend or modify all janitor programs and related procedures Collection Data considered most relevant is collected from the data set that has been preserved; in effect a second round of weeding out data ESI is narrowed for many reasons, all of which must be carefully documented and considered for reasonability Some ESI may have been preserved but is not intended to be further searched or collected as it has been identified as inaccessible under Rule 26(b)(2) primarily due to unreasonable cost or effort Some ESI may not be considered relevant enough to justify further collection efforts The Rule 26(f) conference with opposing counsel then attempts to reach agreement on applicable search terms and de-duplicate parameters Prepare for actual data collection Implement data collection plan from all applicable sources (tape drives, portable storage devices, networks, etc.) Team directs supervision of technical activities to confirm valid chain of custody and authenticity protocols, including preservation of metadata, hash authentication, labeling and identification Processing Initial processing of ESI, primarily de-duplication, is performed in tandem with collection to avoid unnecessary vendor search charges Overall set of data collected is reduced by filtering out duplicate files or those known to be irrelevant due to factors such as date, type, or origin Hot files, obviously adverse or potentially embarrassing materials can be flagged here or brought to the attention of counsel Files filtered must be marked and reasons for filtering must be kept Conversion of ESI from native format into another form required by counsel or court occurs at this stage E-discovery team should maintain a full copy of all data collected and maintain originals of any media as necessary, including backup tapes Quality control is important in processing and review phase to avoid spoliation problems Review ESI is now reviewed in depth for relevance, confidentiality, privilege, and activities such as redaction Appropriate search techniques can include keyword, Boolean, proximity, and concept searching Review team segregates all privileged and confidential documents located and prepares a Privilege Log 22-5 Analysis Analysis is a traditional legal step where data is evaluated to determine relevant summary information such as key issues, witnesses, specific vocabulary and jargon and important individual documents Typically, this step involves integration of the data into trial preparation software Production If not done previously, data is hash marked, labeled and culled for production Data is delivered to opposing counsel and other recipients in various types of media Prior to production, counsel should have negotiated and executed clawback and confidentiality agreements Presentation How will the data be presented at trial? Evidentiary Problems and ESI The December, 2006 amendments to the FRCP relating to electronic information focused on the problems and potential solutions for handling ESI in discovery. Since the effective date of the revised FRCP, very little guidance exists on how to handle authenticity, admissibility, hearsay ad other evidentiary problems associated with ESI What is required to insure that ESI obtained during discovery is admissible at trial? Significant guidance came in the form of a 101 page opinion of Chief Magistrate Judge Paul W. Grimm in the District of Maryland case of Lorraine v. Markel American Ins. Co., 2007 WL 1300739 (D. Md. May 4, 2007), which sets forth in definitive fashion and in great detail, the evidentiary pitfalls and solutions associated with ESI The opinion in this case is by far the most comprehensive judicial analysis to date on evidentiary issues affecting ESI His opinion in this seminal case inevitably leads one to the conclusion that forensic data collection is the prerequisite for authentication of ESI for all but a small class of cases Further, even where the relatively low threshold for authentication of ESI can be met through other means, forensic data collection provides the strongest source of authentication evidence. Lorraine v. Markel In this case, Judge Grimm dismissed cross-motions for summary judgment to enforce/modify the decision of a private arbitrator concerning lightning damage to a yacht. Prior to Lorraine v Markel, there was indeed very little written on this issue and with this extensive analysis, Judge Grimm has certainly filled the void 22-6 Summary Judgment Motions and Evidentiary Issues When considering the cross-motions for summary judgment, Judge Grimm noted that unsworn, unauthenticated documents cannot be considered by the court because the court can only consider evidence that would be admissible at trial The judge noted that “considering the significant costs associated with the discovery of ESI, it makes little sense to go to all the bother and expense to get electronic information only to have it excluded from evidence or rejected from consideration during summary judgment because the proponent cannot lay a sufficient foundation to get it admitted.” Evidentiary Hurdles that must be Cleared Whenever ESI is offered as evidence, either at trial or summary judgment, the following evidence rules must be considered Is the ESI relevant as determined by FRE 401, 402, and 105 (does it have any tendency to make some fact that is of consequence to the litigation more or less probable than it otherwise would be)? If relevant, is it authentic as required by Rules 901 and 902 (can the proponent show that the ESI is what it purports to be? If the ESI is offered for its substantive truth, is it hearsay under Rule 801 and if so, is it covered by an applicable exception? Is the form of the ESI that is being offered as evidence an original or a duplicate under the original writing rule, or if not, is there admissible secondary evidence to prove the content of the ESI under Rules 1001-1008? Is the probative value of the ESI substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or one of the other factors identified by Rule 403? The hurdles for relevance, hearsay, and probative value do not differ whether the evidence is ESI or in paper form. Authenticity however, is much more complicated for ESI as “courts have recognized that authentication of ESI may require greater scrutiny then that required for the authentication of hard copy documents” Such greater scrutiny must be paid because, as the Manual for Complex Litigation observes, “computerized data….raise unique issues concerning accuracy and authenticity” due to human error, equipment malfunction, unscrupulous behavior, damage, contamination, improper search and retrieval techniques, and programs that produce accurate but misleading results. Judge Grimm made this point infinitely clear in commenting that “if it is critical to the success of your case to admit into evidence computer stored records, it would be prudent to plan to authenticate the record by the rigorous standard that might be applied.” This is critical for assuring the continuing integrity of the database and as noted is pertinent to the question of whether records have been changed since their creation. The judge warns that computer stored records and data can be a major source of authentication problems and hence, rigorous authentication standards are a must Judge Grimm identified the Court’s decision in In Re Vee Vinhee, 336 B.R. 437, 444 (B.A.P. 9th 2005) as the “high water mark” for demanding authentication approaches 22-7 In Re Vee Vinhee The primary authenticity issue in the context of business records in this case, as identified by the Court was “what has, or may have, happened to the record in the interval between when it was placed in the files and the time of trial. In other words, the record being proffered must be shown to continue to be an accurate representation of the record that was originally created…hence the focus is not on the circumstance of the creation of the record, but rather on the circumstances of the preservation of the record during the time it is in the file so as to assure that the document being proffered is the same as the document that originally was created.” Judge Grimm then noted that in order to meet the heightened demands for authenticating ESI, the Vee Vinhee court adopted, with some modification, an eleven step foundation proposed by Professor Edward Imwinkelreid Thus the methods of authentication most likely to be appropriate for computerized records are: witness with personal knowledge (Rule 901(b)(1)), expert testimony (Rule 901(b)(3)) and systems or processes capable of producing a reliable result (Rule 901(b)(4)). Practical Tips for Addressing ESI Evidentiary Issues It is critically important that counsel begin to think about admissibility and authentication issues at the early stages of discovery It is prudent to authenticate the ESI by the most rigorous standard that may be applied During pre-trial discovery, counsel should determine whether opposing counsel will object to the admissibility of critical information. It is critical for counsel to be prepared to provide the Court with enough information to understand the technology issues as they relate to the reliability of the evidence at hand Counsel should consider whether there are case management tools that might assist the Court and the parties in addressing evidentiary problems concerning some of the more complex issues The Sedona Conference Commentary on ESI Evidence and Admissibility Issued March, 2008 thesedonaconference.org Contains a survey of the various types of ESI and the applicability and application of existing evidentiary rules and case law (Lorraine, Vee Vinhee) addressing those issues, identifies new issues looming on the horizon, and provides practical guidance on the use of ESI in depositions and in court to better position for its admissibility The Sedona Conference Commentary on Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process Issued in May, 2009 as a public comment version Commentary employs two terms involving quality: Quality control – refers to specific procedures, tools and techniques that ensure that high quality is maintained throughout various stages of the e-discovery process 22-8 Quality assurance – refers to methods and metrics used at the end of the process to assess and ensure that an e-discovery process is accurate and complete Five measures of quality: Judgmental sampling Similar to audit sampling Subjective not objective Senior attorney will select a few random or significant folders of electronic documents coded by a particular reviewer to determine if that person has made the correct responsiveness calls. Sample can be expanded if error rate deemed too high Independent testing Third party professionals are retained to examine a process or approach and report on whether results can be replicated and confirmed Reconciliation techniques Accounting for the impact of a process (comparing inputs to outputs) has long been used in the fields of accounting, manufacturing, and engineering For example, comparing what volumes of e-mail entered a process, what remains in a process (e.g. after de-duping), and what exits a process Inspection to verify and report discrepancies Involves the deployment of seasoned experts to inspect and observe the performance of tasks by lesser experienced staff Statistical sampling Permits statements to be made about the population from which the sample was drawn with statistical confidence 22-9 AICPA National Forensic Accounting Conference “Is It Real or Is It Memorex?” Emerging Issues in Electronic Discovery Thomas E. Hilton, MS, CPA/ABV/CFF, ASA, CVA Anders Minkler & Diehl LLP September 24, 2009 The Swan Hotel, Orlando, Florida Insert Your Logo Here Amendments to FRCP www.supremecourtus.gov/orders/courtorders/frav06p.pdf Insert Your Logo Here 2 22-10 Authenticity Insert Your Logo Here 3 Authenticity Federal Rule of Evidence 901 (a) The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. Insert Your Logo Here 4 22-11 Authenticity Paper documents • Physical tampering is apparent Electronic information • Changes can go undetected Insert Your Logo Here 5 Authenticity Issues: Is there such a thing as an original anymore? If ESI relied upon by litigator and forensic expert cannot be authenticated, are expert opinions built on sand? If the ESI fails to meet authenticity standards of FRE 901 or 902, will it be admissible at trial? Insert Your Logo Here 6 22-12 Information Insert Your Logo Here 7 Time 1990 1450 900 B.C. 5000 B.C. Recorded Communications (Volume) Chiseled Stone Cloth/ Parchment Printing Press Electronic Technology Insert Your Logo Here 8 22-13 Information Inflation: Can the Legal System Adapt? George Paul & Jason Baron 13 RICH. J.L, & TECH. 10 (2007) http://law.richmond.edu/jolt/index.asp Insert Your Logo Here 9 Information Inflation New technology allows a form of writing free from all physical confines Quantity of information humankind can create is unlimited Insert Your Logo Here 10 22-14 Data Storage Costs 1 Gigabyte 1990 $20,000 2008 < $1 Insert Your Logo Here 11 Economics of ESI Cost to store one gigabyte < $1 Cost to manually review one gigabyte ~ $30,000 Insert Your Logo Here 12 22-15 Information Inflation Future is incomprehensible Forecast is for inflationary period to continue Computer power in the form of artificial intelligence could approach or exceed the capacity of the human mind A new Information Ecosystem is emerging Writing has grown into something akin to “a new form of life” Insert Your Logo Here 13 Impact on Legal System Discovery = E-Discovery 98% of all records are ESI 98% of all federal court cases settle Settlement occurs after discovery Parties assess their relative positions Evaluate strengths and weaknesses of case Insert Your Logo Here 14 22-16 Impact on Legal System Vast majority of litigation costs are for discovery Litigators are really discovery lawyers and negotiators Discovery is the key task of litigation Insert Your Logo Here 15 New Trends in Legal Practice: National E-Discovery Counsel Insert Your Logo Here 16 22-17 ESI Search Techniques “De-Duplication” software “Near De-Duplication” tools Key Word Search Concept Searching Insert Your Logo Here 17 ESI Search Techniques False Hits for Word “strike” Labor union negotiations Military action Abusive relationship Options trading Baseball Insert Your Logo Here 18 22-18 ESI Search Techniques Concept Searching A search process that attempts to locate information that relates to a desired concept without the presence of a particular word or phrase Insert Your Logo Here 19 ESI Search Techniques Disability Rights Council of Greater Washington Washington Area Transit Authority, 2007 WL 1585452 (D.D.C. June 1, 2007) Insert Your Logo Here 20 22-19 ESI Search Techniques The Sedona Conference Best Practices Commentary on the Use of Search and Retrieval Methods in E-Discovery (August, 2007) www.thesedonaconference.org Insert Your Logo Here 21 E-Discovery Process Electronic Discovery Reference Model http://www.edrm.net/wiki/index.php/Main_Page Insert Your Logo Here 22 22-20 E-Discovery Flow Chart Processin g Preservation Records Mgmt Review Identification Production Presentation Collection Analysis Volume Relevance Insert Your Logo Here 23 Steps in the EDRM Model Records Management Identification Preservation Collection Processing Review Analysis Production Presentation Insert Your Logo Here 24 22-21 Evidentiary Problems & ESI Two issues not addresses in Revised FRCP in 2006: How should companies deal with pre-litigation preservation issues? How should attorneys manage ESI to address the unique problems associated with getting it into evidence? Insert Your Logo Here 25 Authenticity Concerns of Federal Judges • • Electronic records produced for use in litigation may have been manipulated prior to presentation to the Court The programs and procedures used to create and maintain the records can’t be relied upon to protect the document from corporate insiders Insert Your Logo Here 26 22-22 Authenticity Lorraine v. Markel American Insurance Co. 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33020 (D. Md. May 4, 2007) Insert Your Logo Here 27 Authenticity Lorraine v. Markel American Insurance Co. Most comprehensive judicial analysis to date on evidentiary issues affecting ESI Insert Your Logo Here 28 22-23 Lorraine v. Markel Judge Paul W. Grimm “…a comprehensive analysis of the many interrelated evidentiary issues associated with electronic evidence…” “…a broader and more detailed analysis than would be required simply to resolve the specific issues presented.” Insert Your Logo Here 29 Lorraine v. Markel “Considering the significant costs associated with the discovery of ESI, it makes little sense to go to all the bother and expense to get electronic information only to have it excluded from evidence or rejected from consideration during summary judgment because the proponent cannot lay a sufficient foundation to get it admitted.” Judge Grimm Insert Your Logo Here 30 22-24 Evidentiary Hurdles for ESI (from Lorraine v. Markel) “Whenever ESI is offered as evidence…the following evidence rules must be considered: Is the ESI relevant as determined by Rule 401… 1. Is it authentic as required by Rule 901(a); can the proponent show that the ESI is what it purports to be? 2. Is it hearsay as defined by Rule 801… 3. Insert Your Logo Here 31 Evidentiary Hurdles for ESI (from Lorraine v. Markel) 4. 5. Is the form of ESI…an original or a duplicate under the original writing rule… Is the probative value of the ESI substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice…such that it should be excluded despite its relevance?” Judge Grimm Insert Your Logo Here 32 22-25 Lorraine v. Markel “If it is critical to the success of your case to admit into evidence computer stored records, it would be prudent to plan to authenticate the record by the most rigorous standard that may be applied.” Judge Grimm Insert Your Logo Here 33 In Re Vee Vinhee, 336 B.R. 437, 444 (B.A.P 9th 2005) Insert Your Logo Here 34 22-26 In Re Vee Vinhee “The entity’s policies and procedures for the use of the equipment, database, and programs are important how changes in the database are logged or recorded, as well as the structure and implementation of backup systems and audit procedures for assuring the continuing integrity of the database, are pertinent to the question of whether records have been changed since their creation.” Insert Your Logo Here 35 In Re Vee Vinhee, 336 B.R. 437, 444 (B.A.P. 9th 2005) (cited in Lorraine v. Markel) 1. The business uses a computer 2. The computer is reliable 3. 4. The business has developed a procedure for inserting data into the computer The procedure has built-in safeguards to ensure accuracy and identify errors Insert Your Logo Here 36 22-27 In Re Vee Vinhee, 336 B.R. 437, 444 (B.A.P. 9th 2005) (cited in Lorraine v. Markel) 5. The business keeps the computer in a good state of repair 6. The witness had the computer readout certain data 7. The witness used the proper procedures to obtain the readout 8. The computer was in working order at the time the witness obtained the readout Insert Your Logo Here 37 In Re Vee Vinhee, 336 B.R. 437, 444 (B.A.P. 9th 2005) (cited in Lorraine v. Markel) 9. The witness recognizes the exhibit as the readout 10. The witness explains he or she recognizes the readout 11. If the readout contains strange symbols or terms, the witness explains the meaning of the symbols or terms for the trier of fact Insert Your Logo Here 38 22-28 Authenticity The Sedona Conference Working Group on Electronic Document Retention and Production The Sedona Conference Commentary on ESI Evidence and Admissibility (March, 2008) Insert Your Logo Here 39 Emerging Issues The Sedona Conference Commentary on Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process May, 2009 Insert Your Logo Here 40 22-29 The Sedona Conference Quality Control - refers to specific procedures, tools and techniques that ensure that high quality is maintained throughout various stages of the e-discovery process Quality Assurance - refers to methods and metrics used at the end of the process to assess and ensure that an e-discovery process is accurate and complete Insert Your Logo Here 41 The Sedona Conference Five Measures of Quality Judgmental sampling Independent testing Reconciliation techniques Inspection to verify and report discrepancies Statistical sampling Insert Your Logo Here 42 22-30 Electronically Stored Information This is your future! Insert Your Logo Here 43 Thank you for your attention!! Insert Your Logo Here 44 22-31 Emerging Issues in Electronic Discovery Selected Articles and Reference Materials Used in this Presentation Information Inflation: Can the Legal System Adapt?, George L. Paul and Jason R. Baron, 13 Rich. J.L. & Tech. 10 (2007); http://law.richmond.edu/jolt/v13i3/article10.pdf What Good Is It If You Can’t Use It? – Admissibility and Authentication of ESI, James M. Truss and Travis Headley, ABA Business Torts Journal, Vol. 15 Number 1, Fall, 2007 Lorraine v. Markel: Electronic Evidence 101, LexisNexis Discovery Service White Paper, www.lexisnexus.com The “Authenticity Crisis: In Real Evidence, George L. Paul, ABA Law Practice Today, March, 2006 Admissibility of Electronically Stored Information: It’s Still the Same Old Story, Sheldon M. Finkelstein and Evelyn R. Storch, Litigation, Spring, 2008 The Sedona Conference Commentary on Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process, The Sedona Conference, May, 2009, thesedonaconference.org The Sedona Conference Commentary on ESI Evidence & Admissibility, The Sedona Conference, March, 2008, the sedonaconference.org The Sedona Conference Best Practices Commentary on the Use of Search and Information Retrieval Methods in E-Discovery, The Sedona Conference, August, 2007, thesedonaconference.org 22-32 When E-Discovery Becomes Evidence, Leonard Deutchman, Pennsylvania Law Weekly, June 11, 2007 Evidentiary Problems and ESI, Kevin F. Brady, http://www.cgocouncil.com/resources/evidentiary-problems-esi-brady Getting ESI Admitted as Evidence, Phillip J. Duffy and Paul E. Asfendis, New Jersey Law Journal, September 3, 2008 22-33 ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/12/2012 for the course ACCT 555 taught by Professor Briggs during the Spring '11 term at University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online