Law Department Management Blog
Having just published a post on the financial blow to general counsels’ budgets of electronic discovery (See my post of Sept. 8, 2010: costs of e-discovery.), I busied myself with finding posts on electronically stored information (ESI) that do not bash the cash, as it were, as well as metaposts.
Process posts came tumbling out of the blogwork (See my post of Oct. 11, 2008: assistance from internal IT for some discovery tasks; June 4, 2009: project management and e-discovery; June 26, 2009: Six Sigma applied to e-discovery in-house; Aug. 10, 2009: dashboard for discovery management; Feb. 8, 2010: project management software for discovery; Feb. 7, 2009: about 60% of corporate documents are stored electronically; Feb. 4, 2009: different use of term “Early Case Assessment”; Feb. 19, 2010: productivity in document review from double monitors; Aug. 20, 2009: confidentiality issues when inside counsel review sensitive discovery documents from the other side; Aug. 24, 2009: pessimistic prognosis for internal e-discovery teams; April 28, 2010: in-house discovery team at Ford; June 18, 2010 #1: simplified book on e-discovery;
Software and hardware posts were also plentiful (See my post of Dec. 7, 2008: “appliances” that combine specialized discovery software and hardware; Jan. 8, 2009: Clustify software; May 15, 2009: wide range of software needed for in-house functions; and Sept. 5, 2009 #4: Bayesian and concept searching.).
To the above single posts I add six metaposts related to discovery (See my post of July 26, 2008: e-discovery with 24 references; May 3, 2008: internal discovery teams with 8 references; May 15, 2009: litigation support with 18 references and 3 metaposts; April 5, 2009: methods software uses to search with 18 references; Aug. 27, 2008: litigation hold notices with 6 references; and Sept. 8, 2010: costs of e-discovery with 11 references.).