Bored from doc review and had a question.
How would the other party know if you didn't disclose a relevant, but detrimental document? Is there something in the software that lets them know what has been left out? Since you don't normally produce irrelevant documents, is there a real risk that attorneys/paralegals may miss, or intentionally omit to produce, a document that is potentially dispositive to the case? All I see from my end is thousands of documents with coding tags to be marked privileged, confidential, not relevant etc... I'm wondering what everything looks like from a broader perspective.
Other than ethics, what's to prevent a doc review attorney from flagging a "hot doc" as "not relevant"? Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432502
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
- polareagle
- Posts: 336
- Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: Other than ethics, what's to prevent a doc review attorney from flagging a "hot doc" as "not relevant"?
They wouldn't necessarily know, but that doesn't mean it works out for you because you have no idea how the case will develop over the coming years. I have been in trial against firms that did a shitty job producing documents (whether through negligence or malice, I don't know). If you don't produce it, you can't use it at trial. And the document that seems detrimental now could seem much less so in 5 years. We definitely won one trial in large part because of the other side's shady tactics during discovery (not listing relevant witnesses on their initial disclosures, failing to turn over documents, etc.). Trials are rare, of course, but judges don't forgive and forget those sorts of discovery screw-ups. Not listing a witness on an initial disclosure ended up being a multi-million dollar mistake.Anonymous User wrote: ↑Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:49 pmBored from doc review and had a question.
How would the other party know if you didn't disclose a relevant, but detrimental document? Is there something in the software that lets them know what has been left out? Since you don't normally produce irrelevant documents, is there a real risk that attorneys/paralegals may miss, or intentionally omit to produce, a document that is potentially dispositive to the case? All I see from my end is thousands of documents with coding tags to be marked privileged, confidential, not relevant etc... I'm wondering what everything looks like from a broader perspective.
- cavalier1138
- Posts: 8007
- Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm
Re: Other than ethics, what's to prevent a doc review attorney from flagging a "hot doc" as "not relevant"?
In addition to what has already been said, there's a good chance the other side will notice if it's a significant document. Those things rarely exist in isolation, and if you produce 30 emails referring to "Presentation X," someone is going to start wondering why Presentation X wasn't produced.
So yeah, you might be able to not turn over a one-off significant email in an initial production without anyone noticing, but odds are that you'll eventually pay for it. As polareagle mentioned, judges are not forgiving about these kinds of mistakes.
So yeah, you might be able to not turn over a one-off significant email in an initial production without anyone noticing, but odds are that you'll eventually pay for it. As polareagle mentioned, judges are not forgiving about these kinds of mistakes.