Review for Investigation and Review for Litigation Are as Different as a Sprint and Marathon: eDiscovery Trends

There is an increasing number of use cases associated with document review and how reviews are conducted can be quite different, depending on the use case.  How different?  As Brandon Mack of Sandline notes, review for investigation and review for litigation can be as different as two very different Olympic track and field events!

In his article Here’s How Review for Investigation Differs from Review for Litigation, Brandon notes how review for eDiscovery supports several use cases which are also quite different in terms of the workflows used to accomplish them.  Two of them – investigations and litigation – are typically as different as the 100-meter dash and the 26.2-mile marathon in terms of how they’re conducted and it’s important to understand those differences when it comes to planning for each of these use cases.

As you might guess, investigations are the 100-meter dash in this analogy – they are conducted quickly to determine the “who, what, where and when” of the issue to determine whether there’s a problem and, if so, the extent of that problem.  On the other hand, review for litigation is more like the marathon.  It’s planned, methodical and involves management of a team of reviewers, which is why the term “managed review” is often used to describe that service offered by review providers.


So, how else are they different?  And at what point (as Brandon notes) does the analogy break down?  I won’t steal Sandline’s (and Brandon’s) thunder, you can check out the article here on the specifics.  It’s safe to say that his discussion of the breakdown of the analogy would make for an interesting Olympic event!  😉

So, what do you think?  What differences have you seen between investigation and litigation review projects?  Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.

Disclosure: Sandline is an Educational Partner and sponsor of eDiscovery Today

Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.


Leave a Reply