E-Discovery Advisory: Courts Seek Sanity in the Development and Implementation of Search Terms


Practitioners have long recognized that search term culling of electronic document databases consisting of millions of pages is often the only way to make production from these sources cost-effective and time-feasible.1 Increasingly, courts also recognize the utility of search terms to retrieve responsive electronically stored information. However, with recognition comes scrutiny‚ and with scrutiny comes frustration.

One recent opinion from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York highlights this budding judicial scrutiny of the use of search term culling as well as a commensurate level of frustration with litigants who allow e-discovery disputes to escalate to motion practice. See William A. Gross Constr. Assocs., Inc. v. Am. Mfg. Mutual Ins. Co., Docket No. 07 Civ. 10639 (LAK)(AJP), 2009 WL 724954 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. March 19, 2009) (Peck, M.J.).

Please see full advisory for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Mintz Levin | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Mintz Levin on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.