eDiscovery Today is six years old! What better way to celebrate than with a new whitepaper on evaluating methods for review in eDiscovery today*!
The whitepaper – titled Looking for Validation: Evaluating Methods for Review in eDiscovery Today and based on the eDiscovery Today webinar of the same name conducted in September 2025 – is designed to discuss the different approaches to review, the considerations for evaluating each approach, and how to help ensure a valid outcome. It contains additional content not found in the webinar, including current review approach trends, an example of a review approach that led to a “huge discrepancy” between the number of responsive documents expected to be found and the number actually produced, and an additional resource for evaluating the results of your review approach.
So, how do you get the new whitepaper on evaluating methods for review in eDiscovery today? If you are currently an email follower of the blog, you will be receiving a link to the report in the next two or three days. If you’re not currently an email follower of the blog, you can get a FREE copy of the report (and any report eDiscovery Today publishes) simply by following the blog via email. To follow eDiscovery Today, enter your email address at the top of the right sidebar where it says “Follow Blog via Email” to receive the report as well as emails with links to new posts. It’s that easy!
Let’s face it: There are more approaches than ever for conducting review in eDiscovery. However, the more approaches there are, the more questions legal professionals have regarding which approach to use and how to evaluate each approach. For example:
- What approach to review are most legal professionals using today?
- Keyword search with manual review is the traditional approach, but should legal professionals be doing more to ensure that it’s effective? Spoiler alert: yes, they should!
- What’s the obligation of the producing party under Sedona Principle 6? Can parties really do anything they want when it comes to production?
- Will generative AI replace predictive coding (aka, Technology Assisted Review/TAR) for review? If so, what can we do to limit hallucinations and help ensure comprehensive results?
- How can you measure the effectiveness of your review approach – regardless of which approach you select?
- What steps can you take to improve the effectiveness of your review approach to help ensure a defensible result? And why should you do so?
Our new whitepaper on evaluating methods for review will hopefully answer all those questions – and more!
There’s no better way to celebrate six years of eDiscovery Today than with a present – to our subscribers! Even on 4/20! 😁
So, what do you think? How does your organization evaluate methods for review? Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.
Image created using DALL-E-3, using the term “robot lawyer wearing a suit looking through a microscope at a computer workstation”.
*See what we did there? 😉
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.