Briefpoint

11 eDiscovery Best Practices for Defensible Discovery

 In Best Practice

11 eDiscovery Best Practices for Defensible Discovery

In modern litigation, electronic discovery has become a defining part of how cases are built and resolved. The growing volume of digital evidence means that every step, from identification to production, must be handled with care and consistency.

However, effective eDiscovery depends on more than technology. It’s about process, coordination, and documentation that keep teams aligned and data defensible.

While the best eDiscovery software can indeed make the work faster and more organized, strong results come from having a clear framework and disciplined execution behind every case.

So, in this guide, we’ll explore eDiscovery best practices that can help you manage data accurately, reduce risk, and stay prepared for every stage of discovery.

1. Define a Clear eDiscovery Strategy and Protocol

A clear eDiscovery strategy gives legal teams a structured approach throughout the entire process. It promotes consistency, reduces confusion, and keeps deadlines on track.

The plan should align with the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM), which outlines the following stages: identification, preservation, collection, processing, review, and production.

When creating your strategy, remember to:

  • Set clear goals for scope, timelines, and team roles.
  • Document every step to maintain transparency and defensibility.
  • Use standard templates for data requests and productions.
  • Define escalation points for handling disputes or technical issues.
  • Update the plan regularly as laws, lawyer tools, and data sources change.

A written eDiscovery protocol forms the backbone of every matter. It should describe how data will be preserved, how privilege will be protected, and what file formats will be used for production.

This structure keeps everyone aligned from the start and helps prevent missing data or inconsistent handling later.

2. Involve Legal, IT, and Compliance Teams Early

Legal, IT, and compliance teams each play a unique role in managing electronically stored information (ESI), and early coordination prevents confusion later. When these teams work together from the start, identifying relevant data becomes faster and more accurate.

For example, when litigation is anticipated, the legal team defines the scope of discovery and which custodians may hold relevant ESI.

The IT department then identifies where that data lives (perhaps across cloud storage platforms, email servers, or internal systems) while compliance reviews the process to confirm it aligns with privacy and retention policies.

If these groups don’t align early, data could be lost, duplicated, or mishandled, putting the organization at risk of sanctions or missed deadlines.

Many organizations now rely on eDiscovery tools that let cross-functional teams collaborate in real time, centralizing case data and tracking progress from preservation to production.

A shared platform improves communication, reduces manual work, and keeps every department accountable.

For teams seeking a simpler, faster, and more reliable approach to document preparation during discovery, Briefpoint offers automation that turns complex requests into accurate, court-ready documents in minutes. 

Book a demo today.

3. Identify and Preserve Data Sources Promptly

Quick identification and preservation of electronic data are key steps in the discovery process.

Once litigation is expected, legal teams must act fast to locate and secure relevant data before it’s altered or deleted. Delays can lead to spoliation or incomplete productions, both of which can harm a case.

The first step is mapping data sources, which means creating a clear record of where information is stored and who controls it. Common data sources include:

  • Company email systems and archives
  • Shared drives and document management tools
  • Cloud storage platforms like Google Drive, OneDrive, or Dropbox
  • Messaging apps such as Slack or Microsoft Teams
  • Employee laptops, phones, or external devices
  • Social media posts

Once these sources are identified, data collection should begin under defensible procedures that maintain metadata and prevent modification. Preservation notices must also be issued to custodians responsible for the data, suspending any auto-deletion or retention policies.

Plus, documenting each step of data preservation builds credibility and protects against challenges later in court. A consistent, repeatable approach keeps the process transparent and helps the team handle future matters more efficiently.

4. Use Legal Hold Procedures Effectively

A well-managed legal hold process is one of the most important parts of data preservation during discovery.

When a dispute or investigation is anticipated, legal professionals must suspend routine data deletion policies and preserve all potentially relevant ESI. This step prevents the loss of key evidence and demonstrates good faith compliance with the court.

A legal hold begins with a clear notice sent to custodians. Employees or departments likely to have relevant documents or electronic records. The notice explains what data must be preserved, how it should be handled, and who to contact with questions.

For instance, if a company expects litigation involving employment issues, HR staff and managers may receive a hold instructing them not to delete emails, reports, or internal chat messages tied to the event in question.

Tracking acknowledgments and sending reminders are equally important. Every action, from issuing the notice to releasing the hold, should be logged for transparency.

Many legal teams now use automated legal hold software to monitor compliance and record each step. This level of documentation protects the organization and confirms that data was preserved properly if the process is ever questioned in court.

5. Collect Data in a Defensible and Documented Way

Once a legal hold is in place and data preservation is confirmed, the next phase of the discovery process involves collecting that data for review. This transition is critical because any misstep during collection can damage file integrity or cast doubt on the evidence.

Moreover, data collection is one of the most sensitive parts of legal discovery, and every action must be defensible if challenged in court.

Legal teams should apply consistent procedures that maintain authenticity and retain relevant information exactly as it existed. This includes preserving metadata, timestamps, and detailed records of each activity.

Defensible collection often involves coordination between legal and IT teams. Data must be copied from secure data storage systems using approved forensic tools that prevent alteration.

For example, when collecting data from mobile devices, specialists may extract text messages or attachments in a controlled environment to preserve their original state.

A simple collection record may include:

  • The person responsible for the collection and the date completed
  • The tools or software used
  • The source systems, such as email servers or cloud databases

Documenting every action supports strong information governance and demonstrates accountability. In large legal proceedings, complete records protect the organization from disputes about data handling and show that the collection followed a defensible process.

6. Leverage Advanced Search and Filtering Tools

Advanced search and filtering tools are core features of any modern eDiscovery platform. They allow legal teams to narrow large sets of data into smaller, more focused collections that matter to the case.

As data volumes continue to grow across emails, chat logs, and cloud solutions, these tools make it possible to manage the document review stage with precision and speed.

In the modern litigation process, the biggest eDiscovery challenges often involve identifying what’s relevant among thousands or even millions of files.

Keyword searches, date filters, and metadata queries help locate information quickly, while advanced analytics can detect duplicate files or similar content that might otherwise be reviewed multiple times.

Some systems also let users analyze log files or communication patterns to uncover hidden connections between custodians or data sources.

A strong review process combines these tools with attorney oversight to confirm accuracy and context. Automation alone can’t replace legal judgment, but it can remove the manual burden of sorting irrelevant material.

7. Apply Technology-Assisted Review or AI for Efficiency

Technology-assisted review (TAR) and AI-powered review systems have become standard in modern eDiscovery because they help manage the overwhelming amount of digital data generated in litigation.

Essentially, these technologies speed up the review of emails, documents, and messages while maintaining accuracy and consistency in how relevance and privilege are determined.

  • Technology-assisted review: Uses machine learning and predictive coding to identify patterns in previously reviewed data, which allows the system to rank remaining documents by likelihood of relevance.
  • Artificial intelligence: Expands on TAR by applying natural language processing and contextual analysis to understand meaning, not just keywords, across large datasets.

In practical terms, TAR and legal AI tools learn from attorney input and apply those lessons to new files, which helps teams prioritize what to review first. This reduces manual workload and accelerates the production of electronically stored information.

When used responsibly, TAR can cut review time by more than half and improve consistency in identifying data produced for disclosure. Combined with human oversight, these tools help legal teams meet discovery deadlines efficiently while keeping the process defensible.

8. Maintain Strong Chain-of-Custody Documentation

A clear chain of custody makes sure that every piece of evidence collected during eDiscovery can be trusted.

More specifically, it records how data moves from collection to review and production, showing that nothing was changed, lost, or mishandled. Strong documentation also supports regulatory compliance, especially in industries where audit trails are required.

To keep all teams on the same page, every handoff should be recorded in a chain-of-custody log. This log tracks:

  • The names of key custodians involved in handling or accessing data
  • The date and time of each transfer
  • The storage location and transfer method used
  • Verification notes confirming file integrity

For example, if an outside vendor receives a set of emails for review, the record should show when the transfer occurred, who approved it, and how the files were verified before upload. Each action must be timestamped and supported by documentation.

Maintaining this level of tracking not only protects against disputes but also helps in ensuring compliance with legal discovery standards. Courts expect transparency in how evidence is handled, and a reliable chain of custody provides exactly that.

9. Review and Redact Sensitive Information Carefully

During the review phase of eDiscovery, handling confidential data requires both precision and awareness of privacy laws and eDiscovery rules.

Legal teams must identify and redact sensitive content before further processing or production to avoid exposing personal or privileged material. Failure to do so can lead to sanctions, data breaches, or violations of legal requirements.

Examples of information that should be redacted include:

  • Personal identifiers such as Social Security numbers or birth dates
  • Financial details like bank account or credit card numbers
  • Private communications covered by the attorney–client privilege
  • Medical records or health-related data protected under HIPAA

One of the most common eDiscovery challenges is maintaining a balance between transparency and confidentiality. Automated redaction tools can speed up the process, but human review is still necessary to verify accuracy and context.

For instance, a legal AI system might flag names or numbers, but only an attorney can decide if they are relevant or privileged within the legal case.

Careful redaction protects both clients and opposing parties, keeping productions compliant and defensible. Every redaction decision should be logged and stored with a record of who approved it, so there is a clear audit trail for future reference.

10. Track Costs and Vendor Performance Throughout the Process

Monitoring expenses and vendor results is an often-overlooked part of the eDiscovery process, yet it has a direct impact on both budgets and case efficiency.

Each stage of discovery incurs measurable costs tied to storage, software licenses, and professional services. So, keeping a detailed record of these figures helps legal teams forecast spending, justify budgets, and identify where savings are possible in future matters.

For example, a law firm working with multiple vendors might notice that one provider charges significantly higher rates for hosting data but delivers slower turnaround times.

Tracking this performance over several projects makes it easier to decide who offers the best value. Metrics like average processing time, accuracy rates, and responsiveness can help build a clear picture of which partnerships are most effective.

Many firms now use dashboards or litigation management software to centralize cost data, automate invoices, and monitor key metrics in real time.

In other words, treating cost and performance tracking as part of the standard workflow keeps the overall eDiscovery process both predictable and efficient.

11. Regularly Update and Refine eDiscovery Policies and Technology

Finally, every organization should treat its eDiscovery policies as living documents that evolve with new data sources, laws, and legal tech software.

Some areas that should always be reviewed include:

  • Backup tapes: Make sure retention schedules reflect current storage limits and recovery options.
  • Preservation measures: Reassess how data is secured to avoid accidental loss or overwriting.
  • Collecting ESI: Verify that approved tools and methods maintain file integrity and defensibility.
  • Producing electronically stored information: Confirm that file formats and transfer protocols meet court and client expectations.

Keeping eDiscovery tools and practices updated not only supports compliance but also reduces manual work. Teams that modernize their approach are better equipped to manage complex matters efficiently.

Autodoc, the newest solution from Briefpoint, takes this a step further. It ends manual discovery work by turning productions and case files into ready-to-serve discovery responses (with Bates numbering and page-level citations) in just seconds.

Book a demo and be among the first to automate their discovery responses.

Briefpoint and the Future of eDiscovery

Strong eDiscovery practices are built through structure, collaboration, and the right technology to keep everything moving smoothly. Each stage of discovery, from locating data to preparing final productions, depends on accuracy and clear communication.

Briefpoint

And when teams work within a defined system, discovery becomes less chaotic and more predictable.

Briefpoint helps make that happen. It replaces repetitive manual work with automation that drafts, numbers, and formats discovery responses in just minutes. The result is more time for strategy, stronger client outcomes, and less effort spent on administrative tasks.

If you’re ready to simplify discovery and see what faster, smarter document preparation looks like, book a Briefpoint demo today.

FAQs About eDiscovery Best Practices

What is the identification phase in eDiscovery?

The identification phase is the first step in locating potentially relevant data for a case. It involves data mapping, identifying custodians, and determining which systems or devices hold important files. This stage helps create a clear plan for collecting and reviewing information later in the process.

How should law firms handle data from personal devices?

When employees use personal devices for work-related matters, those devices may contain relevant electronic communication, such as emails or text messages. Legal teams must balance privacy concerns with discovery obligations by following clear policies and using defensible collection methods approved by regulatory bodies or the court.

What is the standard retention period for eDiscovery materials?

A standard retention period varies depending on jurisdiction and industry. Most organizations align their retention schedules with local laws or third-party subpoena requirements. It’s best practice to consult internal legal support teams to confirm how long records should be maintained.

Why is production format important in eDiscovery?

Choosing the right production format affects how the opposing party can review and analyze data. Courts often request files in native format, digital form, or electronic format with proper metadata and load files to maintain data integrity and preserve context.

How can firms protect attorney-client communications during discovery?

Firms protect attorney-client communications by marking privileged materials, using privilege logs, and reviewing every document before responding to discovery requests or attempting to obtain discovery. Careful review prevents accidental disclosure and keeps the privilege intact throughout the process.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.

This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.

Recent Posts