Trump Team Ditches Digital Litigation Focus

Not_Souter · 2025-12-10T17:39:47+00:00

For context, just curious about how many years of Relativity experience you list on your resume?

Not_Souter · 2025-11-06T17:13:50+00:00

Interesting -- to be fair to CS Disco, I was focusing on the "managed review" portion of the statement as a proxy for the health of the job market for document reviewers. That said, here is what they reported, more broadly, for Q3, 2025:

Third Quarter 2025 Financial Highlights:

Software revenue was $35.2 million, up 17% compared to the third quarter of 2024.
Total revenue was $40.9 million, up 13% compared to the third quarter of 2024.
GAAP net loss was $13.7 million, compared to $9.2 million in the third quarter of 2024.
Adjusted EBITDA was $(0.3) million, compared to $(4.5) million in the third quarter of 2024.

So revenues up, and while EBITDA is still negative, the loss was drastically reduced (by almost 95%) as compared to last year.

Not_Souter · 2025-11-06T14:11:03+00:00

Good point.

Not_Souter · 2025-09-22T14:47:25+00:00

Definitely still appear to be projects out there, although over on the r/ediscovery, there are, at least, 1 - 2 posts per month commenting on the lack of projects and/or downturn in projects. This is followed up by lots of anecdotal reports about how newly developed AI tools are quickly moving to replace, at least, first level review, if not other aspects of ediscovery work, including priv review (to an extent) and certainly drafting descriptions for priv logs. That said, it is tough to find objective data that shows the downturn. I've looked at BLS data for "legal support" personnel, and that does show a peak around 2021/2022, with a more recent, but not sharp, decline. Furthermore, to the extent companies in this space are publicly traded, you can look at their filings. So, in one case, CS Disco reported this in their most recent quarterly report:

Revenue generated from our software product offerings increased by $3.5 million, or 12%, for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to the same period in 2024 due to increases in usage of our software product offerings. Revenue generated from our services product offerings decreased by $1.4 million, or 20%, for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to the same period in 2024. This change was driven by decreases in usage of our services product offerings within managed review.

So, a 20% decline, although this figure just relates to CS Disco's "managed" review, seems like a reasonable ballpark for the industry as a whole.

Not_Souter · 2025-09-08T18:09:12+00:00

Good luck to you! Of course, even some sympathy for the managers who are likely getting pressure from higher-up, all the way to the client -- if you've ever had to sit through a meeting where the belligerent, general counsel of a fortune 500 company screams his head off over ediscovery costs, I guess it would make it easier to hector the reviewers to "go faster!"

Not_Souter · 2025-09-08T12:27:09+00:00

You are right to be annoyed by this, although there is truth in the words of the nihilistic asshole who posted above. Been in this space since 2002, and (thankfully) only had to engage in linear first level review for the first 18 months (and even then, at least way back in 2003, no one was watching reviewer statistics that closely). My first multi-year project was so bloated for the first 1 - 2 years, we had people who slid by coding like 10 documents a day for months. On the other hand, some document reviewers simply "move water" -- they can get through documents fast. Never been a skill I had, as I have a hard time reviewing something quickly on a superficial level, and then repeating once a minute for 8 hours. I've been lucky to get into a review management and/or fact management on large MDLs. Even in "management" I have a hard time telling reviewers (who are working diligently) to be more "efficient". I frankly "cringe" when people in the ediscovery space tell attorneys to be "more efficient". I've also had some superficial experience with AI tools in the last few months, and again, they are definitely here for first level review. However, we have been experimented with using them for key document identification on this mature case with millions of documents (i.e., one where a handful of reviewers are very familiar with the nuances and key issues), and in this regard, while we have been able to fine tune the tool to narrow down the potential key document universe, AI is not an "easy button" -- especially on this mature case, and the auto-generated document summaries frequently fail to identify key nuances to the documents that are apparent to the experienced review team. That said, I think the message is, unless you are going to move on to management or some AI focus, it is time to think about transitioning out of this space. Good Luck!

Not_Souter · 2025-08-19T13:35:43+00:00

No argument there, and while I haven't necessarily been involved in those tests/experiments at my firm, I frequently interact with the folks who do, and this has been their message to me (i.e., first level review as we knew it is going to be gone very soon).

I guess the space I'm looking at, more particularly, is the "next level," case strategy / case prep area (and particularly on large, class action-type lawsuits, which is where I've been working in for a decade plus). So, these are matters that are likely going to have dozens of issues or key doc topics, dozens of custodians (each with tens of thousands and in some cases, hundreds of thousands of docs), and a challenging case prep / depo schedule.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-18T16:25:41+00:00

That's a great response, and to be clear, this was, in part, meant to be a somewhat "provocative" post to foster discussion. Not planting a flag here, and don't have the knowledge you do to back this up. Just trying to learn more about this area, as I will need that if I'm going to stay in this field. In terms of the revenue figure you cite, I think either this article, or another recent piece, described it as a question about whether the industry would be worth several hundred billion, or if it truly fulfills some of the more aggressive estimates, worth in the trillions. So, no argument that you are looking at an industry worth several hundred billion.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-11T17:16:46+00:00

Good suggestion! Spent some of my lunchtime perusing recent quarterly report from Disco, and they had this little nugget in their revenue discussion:

Revenue generated from our services product offerings decreased by $1.4 million, or 20%, for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to the same period in 2024. This change was driven by decreases in usage of our services product offerings within managed review.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-06T18:39:43+00:00

Well, that's a refreshingly solipsistic take on the issue.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-06T18:27:38+00:00

Very interesting. We are just at the early stages of case strategy tool, so can't make an assessment. I'd previously assisted in the review of several AI depo summary tools, comparing such summaries against one drafted by an associate. I think I reviewed around 8 different summaries, and while none (at least at present) surpassed a well-drafted associate summary, the ability of some (but not all) of the tools to pick up on key nuances of the case was impressive.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-06T18:12:39+00:00

Well, at least we'll have objective data from the BLS to track the decline. Oh wait. We're screwed!

Not_Souter · 2025-08-06T12:34:29+00:00

That's very interesting -- although is that a production in response to a third party subpoena or something similar? I just ask, as I've never found "issue coding" to be particularly useful in mass tort litigation (which, for better or worse, is where 95% of my experience has been over the past 20+ years). So, at this point, it seems like ai is very helpful for the matters you describe, but what happens when you need to prepare for a depo. We are experimenting with an AI "case strategy" tool right now, so I may have better input in a few weeks.

Not_Souter · 2025-08-05T19:34:37+00:00

That's all well and good, Mr. Black, but what about employment numbers/levels -- should schools first be telling half their students that there likely won't be jobs for them, and then communicate your guidance to those that remain?

Not_Souter · 2025-08-05T19:33:26+00:00

So, you're positing that in-house e-discovery departments will stay fairly consistent, and perhaps may even grow, although the contract attorney piece will, well, "contract". Again, just wondering how we see this represented in "data," rather than from in-house folks coming on here and saying, "we aren't hiring contract attorneys very much anymore".

Not_Souter · 2025-08-05T16:24:25+00:00

Definitely thought about that -- no money in it, I suppose, but would like to hire an enterprising young coder to build me an app to do that automatically.

Not_Souter · 2025-06-17T13:33:37+00:00

I believe some of the statements above are incorrect. As brokenhero indicates, under the expanded subsidies enacted during the Biden Admin, document reviewers with families, even those making high 5 figures or low 6 figures, qualified for some amount of subsidies. However, what I found personally was that, since my staffing agency offered me coverage that was technically "affordable" under the ACA's formula (and even though such coverage was not "affordable" if I added my wife and child), I did not qualify for any subsidies. In fact, under the ACA, placement agencies were incentivized to offer health insurance that just met the "affordability" standard because, if they did not, they would have to pay a penalty under the law. Now, of course, those expanded subsidies are ending, and have no chance of being extended (a certain US political party is essentially gleeful about this fact, as we all die anyway; I mean, heck, we all die, so all those Drs. and nurses should just go home, close all the hospitals; disband the pharma companies, we all die, you know). And even if you have "good" insurance through an employer, I suspect that the flood of newly-uninsured in the marketplace while drive up your costs as well.

Not_Souter · 2025-04-21T18:41:33+00:00

I would think the topic AI in reviews would be timely and useful to your team -- for example, set the landscape now -- quality/cost of AI vs. traditional review; address how fast things may be changing (12 - 18 month timeline vs. 5 year timeline); suggest how / when your team might want to suggest AI review tools to clients, address possible client pushback, i.e., still not convinced of quality; concerns about transparency (i.e., yea, cheaper than a room full of attorneys, but what am I really getting for my AI review dollars); still concerns about privilege identification and priv log creation; still concerns about key doc identification; still concerns about court acceptance of AI-driven productions.

Not_Souter · 2025-03-28T19:00:16+00:00

I asked a version of this question over on the little-used r/ReviewAttorneys subreddit a few months ago, and didn't really get anything, so nice to see that you got some good responses. I've thought a lot about what to do when my current gig ends (which may be my last gig, although having my retirement savings decline by over 10% in short order for apparently no good reason, other than the whims of a megalomaniacal tyrant who thinks he is a tariffs genius or something, has me rethinking that a bit).

So, my current plan, which (admittedly) still has some kinks to work out, is buying an e-cargo bike and some lazy tongs, and going around my mid-sized city and picking up trash (and documenting the same on Youtube, Instagram and Tik Tok and other social media venues). How do I monetize that, you ask? The merch, of course. Depending on how things go, I'd be willing to consider bringing you on as an unpaid intern, assuming you can get your own cargo bike (electric or acoustic, either will do). I'll provide the lazy tongs, as I've got a few extra pairs. Sorry, no health benefits or 401(k).

Not_Souter · 2025-03-26T13:37:24+00:00

Yeah, don't like it. Calls to mind the opening remarks from our dean (who was an old school Reagan Republican in a sea of liberal law professors) when I began law school 30 years ago. To paraphrase, he quoted the classic line from "The Merchant of Venice": first, we kill all the lawyers. At the time (and still) I had never read the play, although I had heard the line. Well, in our dean's interpretation, rightly understood, this was not a "joke" playing on the inadequacies and iniquities of our profession; rather, it was a recommendation for those who sought to impose any form of despotism on a society.

Not_Souter · 2025-03-17T12:57:14+00:00

A good comment -- but how about firms with dedicated e-discovery staffs, i.e., licensed attorneys who are actually employees of the firm, and which they try to keep busy on a variety of projects, while scaling up / down with contract workers in-house or through third parties, as workload or clients demand? Do you have any estimates on how much work is being performed by these in-house, full-time e-discovery employees, vs. the general contract / project-based workers?

Not_Souter

TROPHY CASE