The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association
Issue link: http://read.uberflip.com/i/116777
David Pilling has over 25 years of information technology experience and spent over seven years as the director of technology at Jenner and Block LLP. For the past six years, David has leveraged his expertise to provide consulting services to several Am Law 100 law firms by working closely with senior firm management to identify and improve upon the strategic value of their technology. He is a frequent presenter at legal technology industry events. David can be contacted at dpilling@docauto.com. Proactively managing the explosive growth of email has been a recurring topic of interest for several years. Managing data is important not only for space requirements but also for utilizing the valuable information it contains. However, historically, managing large repositories of email content has proven ineffective due to the tools, techniques and processes being used. The limitations of email systems and the large volume of email data stored within them have caused system databases to impact system performance and stability negatively. To remediate the issue, most firms took advantage of an emerging email technology referred to as "email archiving." These systems allowed firms to offload large portions of their email content to secondary databases, from which users could access, search, retrieve and store email data. But that was just the beginning: Intelligent content analysis has brought a new level of sophistication for the real-time management of email. AVOIDING SEPARATE DATA COLLECTIONS Although email management practices vary, from a risk perspective, maintaining separate collections of matter-related content can cause negative issues related to: • Discovery of multiple repositories, which can be expensive (and email messages may have been mistakenly preserved when believed to have been deleted) • Litigation holds, court-ordered destruction notices and client requests for the release and expulsion of their matter-related content resources and content knowledge associated with the due diligence review of multiple data repositories • Noncompliance of state and federal laws (e.g., HIPAA, ERISA) Peer to Peer 75