Episode One: Flying with Global Aerospace: An Inside Look at the First TAR Case
Hear how Tom Gricks, the lead attorney on the Global Aerospace case, obtained the first order authorizing the use of technology assisted review (TAR) over the objection of opposing party.
Episode Two: The Birth of TAR 2.0 (and CAL) With Dr. Jeremy Pickens
Learn about the birth of continuous active learning from Dr. Jeremy Pickens, Catalyst’s chief scientist. He details the differences between TAR 1.0 and 2.0 and how different systems work.
Episode Three: Is “Backing up the Trucks” Still a Legitimate Strategy in the TAR Era?
John Tredennick and Tom Gricks review a recent decision In Re Domestic Airline Travel Antitrust Litigation, 2018 WL 4441507 (D.D.C. Sept. 13, 2018), a multidistrict class action litigation. Was the plaintiff’s side forced to review non-relevant documents (a document dump) or was it human error?
Episode Four: Can You Do Good TAR with a Bad Algorithm?
Should proportionality arguments allow producing parties to get away with poor productions—simply because they wasted a lot of effort due to an extremely bad algorithm? Dr. Bill Dimm, founder and CEO of Hot Neuron (the maker of Clustify software) joins our hosts to discuss whether one can do “good” TAR with a bad algorithm.
Episode Five: EDRM TAR Guidelines: What’s Good and What’s Not So Good? The TAR Talk Take
After two years of work, Duke Law and EDRM recently published the TAR Guidelines. In this podcast, we give you the TAR Talk take with the good and the not so good. Join us for a fun discussion.
Episode Six: The Latest TAR Poll Results
Rob Robinson of ComplexDiscovery just released the results from the Spring 2019 Predictive Coding Technologies and Protocols Survey. In this episode, we look backwards and forwards and give you the TAR Talk Take.
Episode Seven: TAR Talk featuring Honorable Judge Andrew Peck (ret.)
We talk with Judge Peck, one of the leading judges moving TAR law forward.
Episode Eight: Validation: How Do We Know TAR Worked?
Tom and John take a shot at this tricky topic.
Episode Nine: Fear of Missing Out?
Herb Roitblat recently released a paper called FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), which provided a mathematical analysis of relevance recall for TAR projects. The EDRM claimed that the “analysis has the potential to be a game changer” for legal search and review. Is it? Tune in for the TAR Talk take on Herb’s paper and his analysis. Information Scientist Bill Dimm will be joining us to talk about the math.
Episode Ten: The Battle Between TAR 1.0 and TAR 2.0
The battle between TAR 1.0 and TAR 2.0 rears its ugly head. When is TAR 1.0 the best approach and when is TAR 2.0 better? You may be surprised at our views on this. Tune in for the TAR Talk Take with Tom and John.
Visit the TAR Talk homepage here: TARTalk.org
Prior to forming Catalyst, John was a nationally known trial lawyer and longtime litigation partner at Holland & Hart. Over the past four decades he has written or edited eight books and countless articles on legal technology topics, including two American Bar Association best sellers on using computers in litigation technology, a book (supplemented annually) on deposition techniques and several other widely-read books on legal analytics and technology. He served as Chair of the ABA’s Law Practice Section and edited its flagship magazine for six years.
John’s legal and technology acumen has earned him numerous awards including being named by the American Lawyer as one of the top six “E-Discovery Trailblazers,” named to the FastCase 50 as a legal visionary and named him one of the “Top 100 Global Technology Leaders” by London Citytech magazine. He has also been named the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year for Technology in the Rocky Mountain Region, and Top Technology Entrepreneur by the Colorado Software and Internet Association. John regularly speaks on legal technology to audiences across the globe. In his spare time, you will find him competing on the national equestrian show jumping circuit or playing drums and singing in a classic rock jam band.