Extract from Phil Favro’s article “Judicial Guidance on Enhancing Conflicts Screening for Document Reviewers”
AI is revolutionizing how lawyers and their clients handle legal matters, including the discovery process in civil litigation. One of the more intriguing use cases for AI includes the search for, identification, and review of documents. Referred to by several different names, including Human-Assisted Review (HAR), AI-driven review workflows—depending on the circumstances of the case—could provide clients with the potential to more efficiently identify responsive documents. Some have even suggested that AI-review workflows could reduce the reliance on or possibly even eliminate document review attorneys in the future.
That scenario—one in which document review attorneys become obsolete—remains theoretical. Lawyers are still working with vendors to staff document review projects with skilled contract review attorneys, and those attorneys are still a key aspect of many review workflows. With that being the case, lawyers and clients should make sure that their document review process—an integral portion of which may include review attorneys—satisfies acceptable practices for both legal and ethical issues.
An important aspect of developing defensible review workflows is ensuring that document review attorneys meet ethics standards, including competence, confidentiality, and conflicts of interest. While the first two items are clearly front and center when it comes to review workflows, the significance of having a vigorous conflicts of interest screening process should not be overlooked.
