X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Technology-assisted Review (TAR): Winfield v. City of New York, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 194413 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 27, 2017). Resolving a discovery dispute that challenged the defendant’s predictive coding process, the court refused to question the accuracy and reliability of the use of TAR, despite some noted review errors. Specifically, the plaintiff contended that the defendant too narrowly interpreted relevance and miscoded relevant documents as irrelevant. As such, the court ordered the production of some non-responsive documents to provide better transparency and encourage cooperation.

Victoria Hudgins

I am a reporter for Legaltech News, where I cover national and international legal tech innovations and developments.

More from this author

Lean Adviser Legal

Think Lean Daily Message

"A helpful image is the client leaning out of train window while it gathers pace, as you run alongside. Get out the key nuggets first and in order of importance. The rest is waffle that the client doesn t want to hear, read or pay for."

Learn More

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2018 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.