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.
Please see full publication below for more information.
