Home » Corporate Counsel » 13 Filtered eDiscovery Statistics to Warm Up for #LTNY16 

13 Filtered eDiscovery Statistics to Warm Up for #LTNY16 

Filtering Content for 13 eDiscovery Statistics to Warm Up #LTNY16

The LegalTech® New York tradeshow has a notable emphasis on eDiscovery.  Given the growing volume of data managed in the eDiscovery process, analytics, predictive coding and other applications of technology assisted review are a logical fit for a conference centered on legal technology.

This blog often covers legal industry surveys and benchmark studies.  In preparation for the show, we went back through dozens of posts, and the underlying studies, to filter this list of eDiscovery and related litigation statistics.

We’ll also be filtering the sessions and social stream at #LTNY16 for additional facts and stats right here on these pages during the show.  And you can find a freshly filtered cup of espresso in Booth #100 as we brew something else up in eDiscovery tomorrow.

Here are those 13 eDiscovery statistics:

1. Bet the company litigation grows.
  Three times as many companies are facing “bet the company” litigation than in 2014.  Litigation spending is forecasted to increase from $19.36 billion in 2015 to $19.55 billion in 2016.  Source:  BTI Consulting | Summary

2. Cross-border litigation involvement. Eleven percent of 242 compliance officers and GCs surveyed said bet the company litigation inched up from 8% the previous year. In addition, “22% said their companies’ litigations involved regulatory matters, compared with 6% in 2014.” About a quarter of respondents indicated involvement in cross-border litigation, “compared with 22% in 2014.”  Source:  AlixPartners, LLP | Bloomberg | Summary

3. Litigation proceedings to rise.
“Overall, 25 percent of respondents anticipate litigation against their companies increasing in the next 12 months, compared with just 14 percent who predict it will decrease. Twenty-two (22) percent increased the number of outside firms on their rosters in the past year, and half of all respondents have spent more time during the last three years addressing regulatory requests or enforcement proceedings.” Source: Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2015 Litigation Trends Annual Survey | Summary

4. eDiscovery began in 1999.  The new frontier of eDiscovery was born in earnest as recently as 1999, when a University of California study found that 93% of all information generated that year was created in digital form, on computers. Source: Law Partner Publishing, LLC | Summary

5. The cost of eDiscovery.  “The majority of Fortune 1000 corporations now spend in the ballpark of $5 million to $10 million annually on e-discovery, with several companies reporting costs as high as $30 million in 2014. A full 70% of the costs were tied directly to the physical review of documents, according to a study from FTI Consulting. That boils down to about $1.8 million per case, or about $18,000 a gigabyte, which is about equal to a pickup truck full of data, according to a 2012 Rand study.” Source: MarketWatch

6. Predicting eDiscovery costs.  Some 35% of legal operations survey respondents “always or sometimes use data mining and analytics to predict discovery costs.”  Source: Blickstein Group | Summary

Also see these related posts:
Faster, Easier eDiscovery Review: The New Concordance Desktop

Walmart AGC:  Keys to “Insourcing” Early Case Assessment
Early Case Assessment: 3 Words to Drive Down eDiscovery Costs

7. Cool adoption rate with new technologies.  About one-third of corporations, 38%, have not employed new eDiscovery technologies.  The percentage grows to 50% when looking “at middle market organizations.” Source:  BDO Consulting | Summary

8. The court sanctions hammer. In an August ruling, an airline was ordered to pay more than $2.7 million in sanctions for failing to turn over electronic data, in addition to more than $4.7 million in sanctions for earlier discovery violations. The author explains the importance of this order and how it came about in the case.  Source: ACEDS | Summary

9. Feds face eDiscovery challenges too. When it comes to defending electronic records before opposing lawyers or Congress, three out of four federal CIOs say they lack confidence in the quality of their eDiscovery programs.  Source: Deloitte | CIO Journal | Summary

10.  ECA as cost containment.  In a survey of sophisticated legal departments among U.S. property and casualty (P&C) insurance carriers 76% said early case assessment (ECA) was the top litigation cost containment strategy.  It was the most popular technique and of those that use ECA, 98% said it is effective. Source: LexisNexis | Report

11. Filtering out irrelevant data.  “Some companies have been able to reduce the amount of data subject to review by as much as 85 percent with a robust early case assessment effort.” Source: Legaltech News | LexisNexis

12. Focus upstream. At the end of 2014, the left-side of the EDRM attracted the greatest budget increases for the next year.  A survey of Am Law 200 law firms found 8 in 10 firms projecting an increase in spending on culling tools (by an average increase of 8.4 percent) and more than 7 in 10 boosting investment on collections and holds tools (by an average increase of 7 percent).  Source: LexisNexis | The Cowen Group

13. Early case assessment grows. The use of early case assessment (ECA) software tools is gradually increasing in the litigation support industry, with 37% of law firms reporting the use of in-house processing/ECA tools in 2014, up from 34% last year and 33% in 2012. Source: 2014 ILTA Technology Survey | Summary

* * *

See some interesting eDiscovery stats of late?  Please feel free to share in the comments.

If you enjoyed this post, you might also like:
Better Search and Getting to Meaning in eDiscovery

Photo credit: Flickr, Troy Tolley, Coffee By The Cup @ Madeline’s (CC BY-ND 2.0)

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Plusone Linkedin Digg Delicious Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Posterous Email Snailmail

About Frank Strong

Frank Strong
Frank Strong is the communications director for the LexisNexis software division located on NC State’s Centennial Campus in Raleigh. In this capacity, he leads communications efforts in support of software products for law practice and law department management and also litigation tools – across large law, small law and corporate counsel segments. With more than 15 years of experience in the high-tech sector, Strong previously served as director of public relations for Vocus, which developed marketing, PR and media monitoring software. He has held multiple roles both in-house with corporations, ranging from startups to global organizations, and has also endured the rigors of billable hours, having completed gigs at PR firms including the top 10 global firm Hill & Knowlton. A veteran of two year-long deployments, Strong has concurrently served in uniform in reserve components of the military for more than 20 years, initially as an enlisted Marine and later as an infantry officer in the Army National Guard. Strong holds a BA in Film and TV production from Worcester State University, an M.A. in Public Communication from American University, and an M.B.A. from Marymount University. He is a PADI-certified Master Scuba Diver and holds a USPA "B" skydiving license.

Note to Frank Strong. E-Discovery started out, long before 1999. As a pioneer, it was Edward R. Zinn, an attorney and myself, who found how to turn electronic data into discoverable evidence, as early as 1985.

It seems a large law firm decided to split-up and when the computers were put up for auction, there was a slew of proprietary and client information left on the hard drives, after I conducted an inspection to see if the IBM AT's were functional. Mr. Zinn, also a former engineer, with the Hughes Aircraft Company, also recognized not only the potential, but had a case, involving an Apple Computer, which contained financial data.

My practice extended into divorce cases, dealing with marital assets and eventually the area of criminal law.

That my friends, is "earnest."

Steven Moshlak

BLSS moderator

@Computer_Forenics_Expert  Great comment and thanks for contributing.  In the book, "Guns, Germs and Steal," author Jared Diamond notes among archeologists, there's a perennial challenge to find the next "earliest."  

The tipping point, is so far as what we can deduce from the UofC study, was the moment legal community a) realized most files were created digitally and b) the sheer volume was growing exponentially.  A clear need for automation and eventually analytics to recognize and help evaluate relevancy among massive data sets.