CBA Bits & Bytes November 2018

November 2018

Chicago, meet eFiling that actually makes life easier.


"Most user-friendly e-filing tool" LEX TECH REVIEW


Trusted by 0 000+ legal professionals across the United States.

No contracts no commitments.


10% 15%




Law Practice Management & Technology BITS & BYTES November 2018 In this, the second issue of Law Practice Management & Technology’s Bits & Bytes, a sup- plement to the CBA Record, we will share business tools, processes, and best practices to you, our readers, in order to expand and improve your practice. In 2012 the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1 (Competence) comment [8] was revised to read: “To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology,…”. The Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.1 (Compe- tence) comment [8] has been updated to reflect the language in the model rules effective January 1, 2016. Inside this Issue Project Managers: Key to a Succesful eDiscovery Partnership ................... Page 4 Your New Second Chair is Organization Technology ...................................Page7 Is Your Opponent’s Discovery Software Withholding Valuable Evidence........ Page 8 Better eDiscovery via Analytics............................................................... Page 10 Seven Tech Tips for Presenting Your Case Before a Jury........................... Page 12 Three Ways to Collect and Properly Preserve Web Content..................... Page 13 Five Adobe Acrobat Features Every Litigator Should Know How to Use ... Page 14 With this supplement The Chicago Bar Association wants to help educate attorneys and legal professionals about best practices, products and services that help them stay com- pliant with the IL RPC and maintain efficient and modern practices to serve clients, pro- vide access to justice and uphold the rule of law.

CONTACT The Chicago Bar Association

321 S Plymouth Ct Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 554-2000

A Supplement of the CBA Record 2018 Chicago Bar Association All rights reserved

LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


PROJECT MANAGERS Keys to a Successful eDiscovery Partnership By Michael Milicevic

What is the average tenure of the PM staff? Given the nature of consolidation in the eDiscovery industry, you can expect some PM turnover at all companies. However, look for companies with 3-5 years of average seniority among PM teams. You want to make sure that you will likely have the same project manager for the duration of your matter. How is general case knowledge recorded and tran- sitioned in the event of a PM’s unavailability due to vacation, sickness or leaving the company? EDiscovery service providers should maintain detailed notes on case history, project specifications and daily activity. You should ask to see a sample casebook or case outline to ensure there is no loss of institutional matter knowledge in the event of unexpected PM absence or case transition. Does the service provider offer and mandate ad- ditional training and certification processes among its PM staff? eDiscovery technology, techniques and workflows are con- stantly evolving. What provisions does the service provider make to ensure its existing staff is up to date on cutting edge developments in the industry? Just like attorneys are required to participate in continuing legal education throughout their career, ask if the company requires similar continued eDiscov- ery training and certification of PMs on the job. Does the service provider have PM-specific client references? Most companies will readily provide general client references upon request, but typically, they are not asked to provide ref- erences for individual PMs. A great PM will have a long list of clients willing to vouch for his/her work product and respon- siveness. In addition to these questions, ask to meet your project manager early in the sales and evaluation process and try to determine whether you feel comfortable and confident work- ing with the person. Your eDiscovery provider’s PM should function seamlessly as an extension of you and as part of your in-house litigation support team. Ask yourself whether he/she is someone you would want to hire internally and work with on a daily basis. If not, request someone new or perhaps move on to consider other service providers. Michael Milicevic, Esq is Managing Director of CDS Chicago. CDS is a full range electronic discovery solutions provider and has been voted “Best of eDiscovery” for six years in a row in the National Law Journal’s reader survey.

When law firms and corporations select service providers to as- sist with their eDiscovery needs, there is typically a comprehen- sive RFP process that focuses on many factors like security, tech- nology, process and pricing. Often times, the vendor evaluation guidelines that most firms follow miss one of the most important criteria in any successful vendor relationship–the people! Below is a list of eight questions you should ask when evaluating the professional service offerings of your eDiscovery provider. What experience/qualifications does your Project Management (PM) team have? It’s important to look for PM Teams with robust law firm, ven- dor and corporate work experience, along with strong technical skills and legal qualifications (ex. RCA, JD, CEDs, PMP etc.). In addition, you want to determine your exact litigation support needs and ask for a Project Manager with complementary ex- perience. For example, large law firms with dedicated in house eDiscovery departments may prefer a vendor PM team with heavy technology certifications (RCA, RAS, RARS) capable of executing database commands quickly and efficiently. Alterna- tively, a small firm or solo practitioner unfamiliar with eDiscov- ery tools may prefer an attorney Project Manager to help guide and train them on eDiscovery best practices and procedures. How are Project Managers assigned to new clients/ cases? Some eDiscovery service providers assign cases based on work load, or whoever is next in line in the queue. You want a com- pany who puts a lot of thought into PM case assignments and takes the time to match the skill sets and qualifications of their PMs to client needs. Who will be your primary point of contact? You should work with a provider who assigns a primary and/ or secondary PM to serve as your primary point of contact. Beware of companies that tout 24/7 coverage and then intro- duce a large distribution list of contacts without assigning any It’s fair to assume that PMs will be working on more than one client matter at any given time, but find out how many active matters are typically assigned per PM. You don’t want some- one who is burned out, or who cannot dedicate the full atten- tion that your matter may need. Active assignments will vary widely, with some PMs managing as few as 1 or 2 very large matters and others who may have up to a dozen or more small active matters at a time. PMs by nature should be outstanding multi-taskers, but everyone has limits. Avoid service providers that appear to be heavily understaffed and under supported. particular individual to your matter full-time. What is the average case load per PM?


LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


To celebrate the Season of Giving, Smokeball is donating $100 to charity for every practice management software demo with one of our small firm specialists. Book a demo today, and help contribute to a cause and to your firm’s success!

(855) 668-3206


Your New Second Chair is ORGANIZATION TECHNOLOGY By Joshua N. Taylor, Esq.

Documents One of the hottest topics in litigation and legal writing right now is the impact of technology on document creation pro- cesses. Some case management systems are so advanced that documents can write themselves! Well, kind of. Document automation tools within case management programs utilize organized case information to prepare litigation documents to the point that the lawyer need only focus on specific docu- ment substance. In addition to utilizing organized information to create documents, documents themselves must be orga- nized and catalogued for any litigator to roll with the punches in the heat of litigation. Again, hard-copy printing can only take the litigator so far. A system of detailed and up-to-date electronic organization should be the litigator’s key tool. Access Access to organized information from anywhere is simply unre- producible for a litigator without case management technolo- gy. Toting around boxes upon boxes of binders with case docu- ments and information is not viable. First, it’s unsafe to bring sensitive information everywhere you go. Second, depending on the volume, it’s impossible to bring with you everything you may need to review in spare time. Third, should you lug around a box of case documents, it likely means that someone else in your office does not have access to those documents in that form; thus, those you rely on to help on the case have their hands tied until you return with the materials. A litigator must be smarter about access to information. Even in many courtrooms, access to case information and various unprinted documents is essential. The difference is saying to the judge, “well, Your Honor, I did not print that particular document,” or quickly bringing something up on a computer or phone to ac- curately describe it to the court and the other side. Jockeying and utilizing information is what litigators do. There is no way to stay effective at that task without clear and detailed organization of all information. Today’s litigators are unfortunately caught between a paper-based era and the technological enlightenment. Technology like case manage- ment software can organize information to prepare a litigator for anything that comes their way. With organization technol- ogy at the table, today’s litigator is much better prepared than their paper-based counterpart. Joshua N. Taylor, Esq. is a Legal Technology Content Marketing Manager at Smokeball. To learn why the most profitable law firms use Smokeball, please call us or visit our website www.

The litigator is constantly three steps ahead. The litigator is prepared to the point of being overprepared. The litigator has their client and strategy at the forefront of their mind con- stantly. The litigator cannot afford errors and mistakes. Today’s litigator must utilize technology to meet all these expectations and requirements. Depending on the courthouse, technology is surely seeping into the courtroom experience, with judge and jury expecting competence in its use. However, what is sometimes lost in litigation’s intersection with technology is the essential assistance it provides in preparation. From the time a new case walks in the door to the day it settles or trial begins, litigators must utilize technology to properly organize information and thus properly prepare. Litigation at any stage requires the jockeying of information at the opportune time to help make your client’s case. Manag- ing information is the domain of technology in today’s legal world. While litigators may insist on hard copies and binders with tabs, the avalanche of documents and information today makes it almost impossible to competently organize all tactile litigation materials. eDiscovery and the boom of document review software to fill an organizational need is case in point. However, even in smaller cases organization and command of information is paramount. The assistance provided by case management software to achieve information organization for litigation is unmatched. Read on to hear about three areas case management technology improves litigation processes by, at the broadest stroke, keeping information organized. Collaboration Litigators are certainly not islands unto themselves (though some wish they could be). Litigation necessarily requires collaboration with other lawyers and the client. Proper case management technology ensures that information and docu- ments can be easily disseminated to and easily edited by vari- ous others working on a case. Without a structured system for collaboration, versions fly by each other and things get missed. One document iteration in one single place means there’s little chance collaboration results in frustration and confusion. Transparent systems where users are told who did what and when let litigators and collaborators pick up exactly where another left off. A case management software that stores all pertinent client and case information assists with collaboration even more broadly than in the context of documents. With all case details in one place, litigators and others know in real time where a case stands and how various information will play into strategy. Collaborative insights are a must for any litigator today. Trying to collaborate without technology creates more work and a greater margin for error.

LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


Is Your Opponent’s Discovery Software Withholding Valuable Evidence? By Casey C. Sullivan

Far too often, discovery is an opaque process, characterized by black-box technologies, confusing processes, and inexplicable costs. In such cases, the discovery process becomes the antith- esis of the liberal transfer of information it was designed to be. Yet, when it comes to ensuring an accurate process—and a fair shake at discovering the facts of a matter—transparency is key. This is particularly true when it comes to discovery software, where the platform used can have a significant, but often under-appreciated, impact on the outcome. Of course, some practitioners are aware that their discovery technology can impact the process. Factors such as cost, speed of review, and usability all play a factor in the software you use. Other nu- anced factors, explained below, are often overlooked. Yet it’s not just the abilities and limitations of your technology that you need to keep in mind, it’s your opponent’s as well. The first step is to know thyself. You’re comfortable with your platform (if you have one at all), but it’s important to know its capabilities and limitations. Often, there is a universe of infor- mation that your documents contain but which your platform may not reflect. Indexing. Some of the most widely used discovery platforms fail to index a surprisingly large number of common words and characters. For instance, most discovery platforms ignore and fail to index all single characters and digits, all punctuation, many special characters, and a whole subset of commonly used words. As a result, many platforms won’t even recognize the word “e-discovery,” as the hyphen is ignored and the ‘e’ treated like an “invisible” single character. The phrase “I did it” often won’t be discoverable as well, as it’s composed entirely of commonly unindexed “noise words.” (Some serious tweak- ing on the backend can typically rectify these oversights—if you’ve got the IT team to handle the challenge.) The importance of the index stems from one of the main ironies of document search—that you’re almost never search- ing the documents themselves. You’re searching your tool’s interpretation of that evidence. All eDiscovery searches are ultimately directed at the index and, typically, the index alone. No amount of special characters, parentheses or quotation marks will serve to identify a word that did not make it into the index. Exception Reports. Another important factor to consider is how your platform treats exception reports. Exception reports disclose the processing errors, or “exceptions,” encountered when preparing data for review, things like corrupt files or password-protected documents.

A platform that makes exceptions clear and transparent makes it easy to identify and resolve any errors. Alternatively, a platform that forces you to seek out exception reports or bur- ies errors under cryptic, overly technical labels, is doing you a disservice—making it harder to identify which documents you actually have access to. And if a document is important enough to be password protected, wouldn’t you want to know that? Embedded Files. Embedded files are “hidden” files that can be found in other documents, such as the database embedded in the pie chart in a presentation deck. Embedded files can be present in any discovery project, but not every platform has the ability to handle them. Some do not extract embed- ded files at all. Others are inconsistent. For your search to be comprehensive, you’ll want to make sure that embedded files are accessible. The Other Party’s Platform. It’s pivotal that you know your tool’s strengths, and of course, the weaknesses. But, because the discovery process is never one sided, you also need to be aware of the abilities and limitations of your opponent’s software. For example, if you are requesting documents that hit for a specific search phrase or keyword, will the producing party’s software be able to handle those searches successfully? It might not if the query includes commonly unindexed words and characters, such as a percentage sign. The same is true for platforms that hide exception reports, so that your opponent, and subsequently you, may have no idea that certain docu- ments were never properly ingested or searched. Typically, there is nothing wrong with using a tool that has limitations. The problem arises, however, when you do not know the limitations of a tool, be it your own or the other party’s, and the potential implications of those limitations. In order to find potentially relevant evidence, there needs to be a transparent process on both sides; and, when both sides take advantage of modern tools, they can minimize the need to fight over file formats, load files, and exception reports. Legal professionals who want to ensure a thorough, accurate, and transparent process will have some research to do—on the capabilities of their own platform and their opponent’s as well. One of the fringe benefits of looking into an opponent’s tools? Finding a better tool for your own needs. Casey C. Sullivan is an attorney in San Francisco who leads education and awareness efforts at Logikcull. Logikcull provides instant discovery for modern legal teams. Its secure, cloud- based solution helps law firms and organizations of all sizes solve the expensive, complex, and risky challenges associated with eDiscovery, internal investigations, and open records response. To learn more, visit and watch a free demo.



“Logikcull saves us time and our clients money.” Stephanie Wilson Attorney at Berenzweig Leonard

Fast Stop waiting on vendors and start a discovery project in five minutes Affordable Pay-as-You-Go with no long term contracts or minimum commitments

Intuitive Searching documents is as easy as performing a Google search

Secure Bank-level security ensures your data is encrypted at rest and in transit

Request Free Account to Review Al Capone FBI Files 844-363-3347



LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


Better eDiscovery via Analytics By JR Jenkins

With enterprise data volumes continuing to grow at a rapid pace and more than 267,000 civil suits filed in U.S. district courts in 2017 (plus another 77,000 criminal cases) legal teams are under constant pressure to improve their eDiscov- ery process. Whether focused on early case assessments, in- ternal investigations or “bet the company” litigation, the legal team that can most quickly identify and analyze key facts and fact patterns is rewarded with important tactical and strategic advantages during the matter. Most document review projects rely almost exclusively on search engines and place an unhealthy emphasis on keywords and keyword search. Search results are then often displayed in a simple relevance-ranked order, based on the number of hits in each document, and attorneys then go “doc-to-doc” in a linear fashion to determine if the documents are relevant to the matter. This process is slow, time-consuming and expensive. More importantly, potentially relevant documents that do not satisfy search parameters can remain completely hidden from view for the length of the matter and whose late discovery can have disastrous consequences. To help address the limitations of keyword search, eDiscovery software vendors have developed a variety of data analytics intended to work both with and without keywords to reduce the guess work and improve the rate and quality of the re- view phase of eDiscovery. Since these analytics are commonly built from keywords and metadata found in the electronically stored information itself, they can eliminate a legal team’s expensive guesswork. Increasingly then, data analytics are being used in law firms to address the following tasks: • Assess the scope and effort required to review the docu- ment collection • Analyze the quality and accuracy of keywords in advance of document review • Analyze communication patterns across individuals and networks • Identify key concepts and terms found inside the document collection • Identify and isolate key periods of activity during the matter • Identify foreign languages found in the case documents • Assess and report on the progress of the review team In addition to data analytics, many eDiscovery applications offer visualization capabilities that allow it to present data graphically. A visual approach to analytics can help attorneys rapidly determine what is and what isn’t relevant to a case. Legal teams can visualize trends, summarize data, see mul- tiple decision points, and drill down and out of data quickly and dynamically to identify an issue’s key factors. In fact, visualizing data in lawyer-friendly ways is one of the most compelling advances in analytics software used in eDiscov- ery—and a great boon to firms with limited or constrained financial and human resources.

Some of the more compelling use cases include: Custodian and Social Network Analysis: This involves analyzing the communication flow between individuals and organizations by zooming, selecting, and isolating targets within a legal matter. Visual analytics can help show what is beyond the dates and documents, including with whom this person communicated, which is often critical in fraud and in- vestigations which try to answer the “who knew what when” question. Date Range Analysis: This provides rapid insight into areas of interests in an investigation or litigation event. Visualizing document or communication frequency against date ranges is an effective way to isolate peaks and ebbs of communica- tion. A team can quickly focus on days, weeks or months that might be critical to an investigation (such as fraud or theft of intellectual property). Concept Analysis: We’ve discussed the limitations of keyword search as a standalone approach to interrogating the docu- ment set. Infinitely better is to have the documents “describe themselves” through visual analytics, which can assemble groups and clusters of documents based on concepts found within the documents. The attorney is now reacting to a known lexicon of terms and can chose his or her own starting points based on the merits of the investigation or matter details. In each of these examples the addition of visual analyt- ics quickly reduces the burden on the legal team, result- ing in faster, better decision-making. Given the number of mission-critical objectives that rely on this knowledge–from better document review and internal investigations to more informed retention polices–data analytics and visualization should be part of your everyday eDiscovery toolkit. Happily, data analytics and visualization tools are increas- ingly being integrated or bundled into eDiscovery software platforms, as opposed to the former practice of selling them separately under different licensing and pricing arrange- ments. The rapid expansion of cloud-based applications means law firms of all sizes can evaluate and license these products much more cost effectively than before. The bottom line is that the benefits of using analytics far out- weigh traditional keyword search-based eDiscovery methods, reducing both the time and expense of preparing a case. Today, for small to midsized law firms particularly, it may very well be the key to creating new services which can help expand their client base and grow revenues. JR Jenkins is the Head of Marketing for Ringtail eDiscovery. Learn more about Ringtail’s advanced visual analytics, award- winning user interface, and flexibility and scalability at


L EGAL D OCUMENT M ANAGEMENT , I NC . Chicago’s Premier Legal Support Service Since 1982 E-Filing Service Provider

The Chicago Bar Association theBar

Login: Law Clerking

Powered by the Young Lawyers Section, the CBA’s new @theBar Blog is full of content relevant to YOU: Judicial Interviews, Committee and Member Spotlights, Practice Area Insights, Work/Life Balance, and more. Monthly columns include:

All Loop Courts and Govt Offices Daley ◆ State ◆ Federal ◆ County Water/Zoning ◆ City Hall ◆ Recorder ~ Draft & Issue Subpoenas Process Service Local & National Process Service ◆

Call Ms. Osborne for Clerking Quote

Skip-tracing ◆ Asset Searches ◆ Expedited via NAPPS contractors ~ Obtain Subpoena Jurisdiction On Out of State Witnesses Eviction & Garnishment Processing

 A2J with Angela  Civil Procedure Tip of the Week  From the Bench  Future of the Profession

 Health &Wellness  In-house Counsel Perspective  Virtual Mentor  Women in the Law

Eviction specialists to attorneys since 1982. All pre-trial and post-trial pleadings prepared and filed within 24 hours. Volume rates available. 221 N. LASALLE STREET, SUITE 1906, CHICAGO, IL 60601 ◆ (312) 726-0036 ◆ Fax: (312) 853-0476 ◆ ◆ ◆

Subscribe to the blog or its RSS feed to receive notice of new posts and be sure to share articles with your colleagues!

LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


Seven Tech Tips for Presenting Your Case Before a Jury By Legal Visual Services

Trial techs are the individuals sitting near the counsel table with the exhibit and deposition database neatly organized in our laptops. We follow the testimony, ready to display the evi- dence on everyone’s monitors in an instant. Our job is to make sure all eyes in the courtroom are looking exactly where the questioning attorney wants them to look. Most trial techs are not attorneys, but your typical tech has sat through more trials than the majority of trial attorneys. We’re in a unique position to observe and watch the jury at trial, so we don’t think like attorneys–we think like jurors. With that in mind, here are 7 tips from the trial tech you can use to be a better trial attorney. Avoid Hidden Exhibits in Video Depositions. Think about how you are going to display deposition exhibits at trial before you schedule your video deposition. You would never put a critical witness on the stand to testify about key exhibits while hiding the documents from the jurors’ view, right? If you schedule a standard video deposition, chances are you are doing just that, as most video depositions capture the witness and the back of the exhibits only. Consider instead scheduling a PIP (Picture-in-Picture) Video Deposition. PIP depositions capture the witness as in a typical video deposition but add a layer for the digital exhibits and live annotations. Utilizing document cameras, trial presen- tation software, or tablet apps, the document is recorded on-screen simultaneously with the witness. This mixed media format will help your jurors maintain attention and better absorb information. Show The Jury That You Value Their Time. Consider this situa- tion: you have a witness on the stand and you’re about to ask questions about a contract clause at issue in the case. You could provide the witness with a set of binders and instruct them to open binder #2 and turn to tab 120. From there, you ask them to flip to the end of the voluminous docu- ment and find Article 3, page 2, subsection e. Or, you could simply state, “I’m going to show you the performance clause in the contract. Do you see that on your screen?” The right page displays immediately, and the exact passage is enlarged for easy viewing. Which scenario do YOU think a jury prefers? Mix Up The Pace And Presentation Method . Our trial system sometimes burdens jurors with the tough task of sustaining constant mental attention for days on end. How do you ensure your jurors aren’t daydreaming during critical testimony at the end of a long day? During a trial, jurors grow accustomed to documents popping up on the screen lightning fast. So, imagine their surprise when suddenly you stop asking the tech to publish a document and instead pick up a piece of paper and a highlighter and walk

over to a contraption they haven’t noticed yet: the document camera. This physical act hits a pause button, giving jurors that much-needed mental siesta. Just don’t overdo it, as overuse of the document camera can create an equally slow pace that will annoy your jury all the same. Give The Jurors A Roadmap During Expert Testimony. T ake a flip board and a marker and share your outline with the jury. A short list of topics you plan on covering is a useful aid that tells them what to expect while making connections between topics. The testimony is no longer an endless train of seemingly unrelated topics, but a roadmap that makes sense. Build Complex Ideas Visually. Nothing loses a jury’s attention faster than a busy slide filled with bullet points and copious amounts of text. Skip the sentences and opt for graphical depictions and icons. After all, you don’t want the jury reading during opening statements or closing arguments. Graphics help keep their attention on what you are saying. Limit visuals to one concept per slide, with few words and simple graphical representations for quick understanding. It’s significantly easier to understand one complex concept if it’s broken down over 5 slides than it is to dissect one cumber- some slide overwhelmed with multiple ideas. Don’t Test Your Technology Just Before Opening Statements. Five minutes before the jury comes out is not the time to dis- cover your laptop cannot connect to the court’s HDMI system. Most clerks are happy to a schedule a time for you to test the equipment in advance. No two courtrooms are the same, even within the same courthouse. Some have no technology at all, some have VGA connections, and others have HDMI connec- tions. Cables go bad, and systems break down. Are your exhib- its better suited for a projector, a large monitor, or individual flat panel monitors? Consider any blind spots in the room. Are the screens visible from counsel’s table, or do you need to bring additional equipment? Does your laptop play audio through the court’s speakers? Testing all these details ahead of time will prevent any embarrassing gaffes. Legal Visual Services, Inc. ( is Chicago’s only source for full service legal video documentation, editing, production, and trial presentation, from discovery through closing arguments.


Three Ways To Collect and Properly Preserve Web Content and Social Media (yes you need to do this!) By Brett Burney & Chelsey Lambert

Just when you got comfortable about collecting email and elec- tronic documents, a new creature emerged from the murky lagoon of digital data … social media. While email still continues to be the primary source of poten- tially relevant electronically stored information (ESI) in most litigation matters, it is quickly taking a backseat to the prolif- eration of web content and social media. It is amazing what humans will say and reveal and admit on public social media channels, and if you are not actively seeking out this informa- tion then you are overlooking a significant source of relevant information. But how do you pull content from a Facebook profile? How do you capture a never-ending Twitter or Instagram stream of consciousness? How do you grab someone’s LinkedIn page be- fore they make changes to it? How do you “print” a web page so that it looks like what you see in your web browser? More and more today, these questions arise in almost every single litigation matter because these digital domains are where your clients and opposing parties are living and interacting. Here are three methods for collecting information posted on the web and social media channels: “Printing” a Website The first method most people try is to simply “print” what they see in their web browser. They either try to print to a physical piece of paper, or “print” to a static PDF file they can save to their computer. While there are a handful of instances where this method could be appropriate for preserving web content, it is a dreadful way to preserve electronically stored informa- tion. When you use the print function inside a web browser, you are effectively attempting to fit the square peg of a dynamic web page into the round hole of an 8½” x 11” sheet of paper. Not only are you losing the significant metadata that’s built into the web page, but the end result will look nothing like what you see in your web browser–the pictures have moved around, the text is scrunched, the ads get in the way, etc. If you insist on using this method to preserve web content, be sure to document who launched the print job, the date & time it was done, the URL it was pulled from, and what web browser you were using. Some of this information can be printed at the bottom of the paper or PDF file, but you may need to check your print settings for this. Screen Capture Software A second method is to use screen capture software. Both the Mac and Windows operating systems have a built-in method for “snipping” a screenshot, but you can also use more sophis-

ticated options such as Snagit from TechSmith (Snagit will even allow you to capture a “scrolling” webpage). While this method will guarantee that the resulting JPEG image or PDF file will visually look exactly the same as what you see in your web browser, it still lacks the ability to collect any of the vital and descriptive metadata embedded into the web page. If you use either of these first two methods for capturing web content, it is highly recommended that you document all of your actions since you are effectively becoming a link in the chain of custody for the web-based electronic evidence. Software and Tools Built for this Purpose This last method is the most comprehensive, reliable, and verifiable–use a software, service, or tool that is built specifi- cally for collecting and preserving web content. Not only do these tools produce an accurate visual representation of the web content (it looks like what you see on your screen), but they collect as much metadata as possible and include a date & timestamp, the server’s IP address, and the web browser that was used. All of this information helps to immediately authen- ticate where the web content came from. Here are a few tools on the market today that you should consider: Page Vault (–they offer an “on demand” option for capturing websites, Facebook profiles, and web con- tent such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, etc. PageFreezer Legal (–they can capture everything from a single web page to social media ac- counts. X1 Social Discovery (–probably the most compre- hensive option for collecting social media but does require a bit of a learning curve to get familiar with the software. There are more tools coming on to the market because this is such an important concern in any litigation matter today. Just be aware that your duty to collect and preserve electronically stored information includes web content such as blog posts and social media, and then consider using one of the tools mentioned above to ensure the job gets done right! Brett Burney & Chelsey Lambert are the authors of the 2018 eDiscovery Buyers Guide at, a handbook that explains when and how to use eDiscovery solutions without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars.

LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


Five Adobe Acrobat Features Every Litigator Should Know How To Use By Catherine Sanders Reach

Batch OCR The Optical Character Recognition functionality in Adobe Acrobat DC Pro has a high degree of accu- racy. If you receive a lot of documents in a non-search- able format, such as TIFF, JPG or scanned PDF images you can run a batch OCR process over all of the documents at once to make them text searchable. Just type “Recognize Text” into the tool search and you will get a new menu called “Enhance Scans” to run OCR on one document. Or choose “In Multiple Files” from the search results and choose a folder or directory on your local drive or attached drive. This process will convert any documents in the folder to PDF and then make them text searchable. Once you have gone through that process you can run an index and do an advanced search to find information in practically any type of file in a set of documents. Search and Index You probably know that Acrobat has a search feature, but do you know what all it can do? Type into the tool search “Ad- vanced Search” and a panel will appear that gives you options to search the current document or a folder of PDF documents. You can do a simple keyword or phrase search, as well as ad- ditional criteria such as stemming, case sensitivity, and more. Searching an entire folder gives you even more options includ- ing date range, author, title and advanced Boolean search. To make search faster and even more powerful you can use the Catalog to create a full text index of a document collection. While this is not a substitute for more sophisticated eDiscovery tools, it is a useful tool for quickly searching a set of documents with some sophisticated search criteria. Batch Bates Stamps In the same file menu as the Enhance Scans (OCR) you will find a Bates Numbering menu. Similar to the Search and OCR op- tions, you can Bates stamp a single file or a folder of files. You can customize output options easily, and see a preview of how your Bates stamps look. Don’t forget to click on the tiny option in the popup screen that says “Appearance Options” in blue, as this will allow you to automatically shrink documents to avoid overwriting the documents text and graphics. Adobe Acrobat DC Pro can be a hugely helpful and vital tool in a litigator’s arsenal if you know what it can do. Catherine Sanders Reach is the Director of Law Practice Management & Technology at The Chicago Bar Association. The Law Practice Management & Technology division at the Chicago Bar Association provides CBA members with an array of services and programming including continuing legal education seminars, technology training both online and in person, and fee-based consulting services to CBA members.

The most current version of Adobe Acrobat, DC (or Dynamic Cloud), is a hybrid of cloud features including document stor- age, a browser based version of the desktop software, e-sig- nature workflows and online review plus the desktop software that integrates with Microsoft Office and apps for your mobile devices. The program provides a wealth of features. Litigators especially should consider the Pro version, at $180.00 per user per year. Why? Read on! Proper Redaction Litigators, when filing with the court, are required to redact certain sensitive information. Some lawyers have made the mistake of attempting to cover up sensitive information by using a Drawing Markup tool, such as a rectangle with solid fill. They place the solid rectangle over the sensitive area and then produce the PDF, thinking that no one will ever be able to discover the “hidden” information. If you read a news story about a law firm having “redaction failure,” you can be sure that this is what happened; someone used the wrong tool to perform redaction. The redaction tool in Adobe Acrobat DC Pro doesn’t merely cover up text or images; it replaces the selected areas with the redaction fill you specify. Redaction is a multi-step process: first mark text or images for redaction, second apply the redaction. Acrobat automatically saves a copy of the redacted file with “_redacted”. You can also do a pattern match redaction search, allowing you to search for patterns such as email, social security numbers, credit card numbers and more. You can search across one document or you can search other PDFs by designating a folder that you want to search and redact. Although pattern matching is convenient for quickly identifying data to be scrubbed, it is not perfect. There is no substitute for reviewing a document the old-fashioned way: by reading every page closely. The John Madden Effect If you need to display documents in court you can show PDFs in full screen mode in Acrobat DC Pro simply by clicking View– Full Screen Mode or by pressing CTRL (or CMMD in Mac) + L. To get out of Full Screen mode click the “Esc” key. With the Zoom tools under View you can call out text, enlarge sections of a page, and more. You can also create bookmarks to easily go to a specific page in a document. Use hyperlinks to jump to a section of a document, and adjust the view so that it is enlarged, or highlighted. Acrobat is not a substitute for a fully- fledged trial presentation tool, but with some practice a litiga- tor can display documents from a laptop or tablet, annotate them and create an interactive display to make the documents come to life.


Minimize Data. Accelerate Review. Reduce Cost.


Document Review

Data Analytics

Managed Services

Digital Forensics


What Could You Achieve with Us?

LPMT Bits & Bytes l November 2018


LPMT BITS & BYTES THE CHICAGO BAR ASSOCIATION 321 S Plymouth Ct Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 554-2000 l

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online