In the last several months, predictive coding technology has evolved from a fanciful presentation topic for legal conferences and industry events to an important discovery tool that is rapidly gaining acceptance in courtrooms. While the legal foundation for using predictive coding may still be muddy, it is clear that counsel needs trusted experts to help them navigate this new territory.
The field of legal technology, and e-discovery in particular, is interesting. There’s a sentiment that the “favorite technology” changes every three to five years. Jim thinks that’s mostly true. Then there’s the saying that when it comes to this industry, the faces never change. And then there’s the truism that the legal industry is painfully slow to change. Don’t hold your breath, but Jim thinks, on this count, 2012 will be different.
Integrating software into a review process that is sound, defensible and affordable is both an art and a science. David proposed a robust quality control process to strike a balance between the art and science.
Yes, we're not in Kansas anymore... and no, Mr. Little, the sky is not falling--further thoughts on the impact of predictive coding. A few weeks ago, the NY Times published an article, “Armies of Expensive Lawyers, Replaced by Cheaper Software,” focusing on the impact that technologies are having on the world of e-discovery, specifically the attorney review process.
Jim responds to Saturday’s front page New York Times story on e-discovery.