While de-duping large collections of restored data saves a great deal of time and money, lawyers should carefully consider whether to de-dupe every e-discovery as a matter of course. Some lawyers now prefer having access to the complete database for production purposes. For example, say Custodian "A" has an e-mail with an attachment and Custodian "B" received the same attachment. You have decided to produce all documents from Custodian "B". However instead of the attachment, you now have a record that says "this is a duplicate" and it refers to a document belonging to Custodian "A," whose documents are not being produced.Furthermore, if you divide collections into separate databases, full-text searches will miss "duplicates" if the original is located elsewhere.
RSS Feed