Co-authored by: Jessica Nutt

Add a recent Virginia state court order to the growing list of orders regarding the use of technology assisted review (TAR)/predictive coding to reduce the burdens and costs – and, some would claim, to increase the accuracy — of review of electronically stored information (ESI). In a short order, half handwritten, the court in Global Aerospace Inc. v. Landow Aviation permitted defendant’s use of predictive coding “for the purposes of the processing and production of electronically stored information.”  

Global Aerospace joins the much-blogged-about TAR disputes in Da Silva Moore and Kleen Products. For those of you keeping score:

Stay tuned as courts ponder whether Technology-Assisted Review in E-Discovery Can Be More Effective and More Efficient Than Exhaustive Manual Review. In the meantime, it is clear that while courts are becoming more open to TAR, we will see more judicial involvement where parties cannot agree on the use and limits of TAR. And even in cases where TAR is permitted, we expect that an opponent of TAR will still have the opportunity to weigh in on and challenge both the inputs to, and results of, the process. As Judge James Chamblin wrote in the Global Aerospace order allowing the use of predictive coding: “This is without prejudice to a receiving party raising with the court an issue as to completeness or the contents of the production or the ongoing use of predictive coding.”