Insights Search

For years, email has been the dominant form of business communication. The average office worker sends approximately 9,000 to 15,000 emails per year. Multiply 15,000 emails across multiple personnel and multiple years, and that leads to an enormous amount of email flowing into review for a lawsuit or investigation. And, as we all know, many of those emails are replies and forwards containing repetitive information that appear multiple times in our inboxes. Reviewing each individual email in those email chains or “threads” can be time-consuming and costly. Email threading can help solve this problem.

Companies in the midst of government investigations and enforcement actions often must contend with follow-on civil litigation stemming from the same issues. Indeed, due to differing standards of proof, companies that are able to successfully ward off government enforcement actions may still find themselves mired in civil litigation that comes with even more significant discovery and exposure to financial liability.

It’s an ever-present threat in our digital world: You get sued, and the case involves your software, website, and/or customer data. The first step in any filed or threatened litigation is to implement a litigation hold to satisfy your preservation obligations. But what do you do?

The difficulty of handling privilege disputes can be especially pronounced in cases involving a prolonged discovery period and large corporate defendants with different document custodians.

Companies rely and track granular and constantly updated data sets every day. But what do you do when you need to preserve, review, and produce that “dynamic data” in discovery?

In the last few years, remote work has proliferated, and with it the discovery process has become more complicated.

Discovery on discovery, or meta-discovery, is discovery directed at the manner and methods that opposing counsel used to locate, preserve, search, review, and produce relevant information.