Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 FEBRUARY 2018

Perfection Not Required In Technology Assisted Review, But Transparency Might Be

BakerHostetler
BakerHostetler
Contributor
BakerHostetler

BakerHostetler

Recognized as an innovator and one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler helps...

View firm profile
Explore more from BakerHostetler

A recent discovery order in a Southern District of New York public housing lottery discrimination case supported the use of technology assisted review ...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

A recent discovery order in a Southern District of New York public housing lottery discrimination case supported the use of technology assisted review (TAR) but required additional transparency, providing another view into how judges will consider the use of advanced analytics in litigation. In Winfield v. City of New York, Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker ordered limited transparency (and encouraged even greater transparency) regarding the defendant's use of TAR after examining their process in camera. Ultimately, Judge Parker found that the defendant's process was essentially accurate and reliable, although the defendant's process was not without its own flaws.

Prior to her review and order, Judge Parker had ordered that the City of New York (the "City" for those readers outside New York) use TAR after the plaintiffs repeatedly complained about the glacial pace of the City's linear review process. Unsatisfied with a general instruction for the use of TARs,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from