Putting E-Discovery to the Test, Again
"In May, the "Geekspeak" column examined a pair of decisions -- United States v. O'Keefe, 537 F. Supp. 2d 14 (D.D.C. 2008) and Equity Analytics v. Lundin, No. 1:2007cv2033 (D.D.C. March 7, 2008) holding that any challenges to or defenses of search methodology (what I will refer to as "automated" searches) in producing e-discovery must be scrutinized under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which governs the admission of expert testimony.
Both opinions were written by Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola, a highly respected and influential voice in e-discovery matters.
In Victor Stanley Inc. v. Creative Pipe Inc., No. MJG-06-2662 (D.Md. May 29, 2008), Magistrate Judge Paul W. Grimm, who, with Facciola, has written the most influential opinion on e-discovery in recent years, following O'Keefe and Equity Analytics in applying the Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 702 principles to the analysis of how search strategies were crafted. Victor Stanley raises the bar in deciding how to craft searches of electronically stored information, and provides valuable guidelines for practitioners."
