Robert Keeling Shares Insights in the eDiscovery Today “2025 State of the Industry Report”

In the “2025 State of the Industry Report” published by eDiscovery Today, Robert Keeling highlights key trends in the eDiscovery landscape.  This report offers an overview of the current state of the eDiscovery industry, based on a twelve-question survey conducted with 551 legal industry professionals and includes commentary from 63 different thought leaders.  

The following outlines Robert’s insights on several important questions facing the eDiscovery community in the report.

…

What do you believe will be the impact of large language model (LLM) and generative AI technologies on eDiscovery solution offerings and workflows in 2025?

2025 will be a year in which we learn and explore how GenAI tools will transform our practice.  Rather than envisioning these tools as replacements for attorneys and providers, we need to focus on how they can empower eDiscovery counsel and providers and bring increased efficiency to clients.  We will also likely see the use of GenAI publicly disclosed in litigation.  Protocols guiding the use of GenAI (similar to TAR protocols) will become public. We will see protocols relating to the use of GenAI for both responsiveness review and privilege logging negotiated by the parties.

Which use case for large language model (LLM)/generative AI technologies do you think has the most upside potential to streamline eDiscovery processes in 2025?

Privilege logging.  Most of the GenAI attention has focused on responsiveness review, but the technology is a natural fit for privilege logging.  Our team is already using it on live matters, and we will see adoption increase exponentially on large matters.

What do you consider to be the current barriers to adoption for large language model (LLM) and generative AI technologies in eDiscovery?

There are several barriers.  The foremost is that attorneys are slow to adopt new technology.  We experienced this hesitation over a decade ago in the early days of technology assisted review (TAR) adoption.  With LLMs and GenAI, there are specific concerns surrounding issues of accuracy, confidentiality, transparency, and hallucinations.  Many of these concerns are overblown.  But despite these concerns, we will see much faster adoption compared to TAR, in part, because we have learned from the TAR experience how to use technology effectively.

Do you think that large language model (LLM)/generative AI technologies will eventually replace the use of predictive coding technologies and approaches in eDiscovery?  Why or why not?

LLMs/GenAI will eventually replace TAR for responsiveness review.  Outside of responsiveness coding, we will see TAR combined with LLMs/GenAI to reach the best results.  In addition, the adoption of predictive coding over the last decade provides a bit of a roadmap for how we can approach the adoption of LLMs and GenAI.  We would be wise to look at the lessons learned from that adoption process and understand that human judgment and management of these tools will be crucial.

What do you think the landscape of mobile device discovery will be in five years in terms of adoption, technologies, and approaches?

We have seen significant discovery issues relating to mobile device discovery over the past years.  But eDiscovery collection and review technology has not caught up – and mobile device discovery remains too burdensome and expensive.  In the next five years, we will see solutions that allow for easier and targeted collections, which will help protect custodians’ privacy while focusing on messages that are actually relevant to the matter.

What do you think is the biggest challenge in discovery of data from collaboration apps?

One ongoing challenge of collaboration platforms is using hyperlinks to share documents that reside in integrated applications rather than traditional attachments.  The difficulty is in collecting and producing the hyperlinked document—and particularly the same version of the hyperlinked document—that was referenced in the message.  This issue has become a hot topic over the past few years, and several courts have devised reasonable procedures to address in the interim.  Other challenges of collaboration environments include how relevant portions of long chat strings can be produced and irrelevant portions withheld.  Artificial intelligence features are also being introduced in collaboration platforms, such as automated transcript generation for videoconferences that, unless turned off, can create additional, voluminous sources of discoverable documents (of questionable accuracy).

What do you think is the fastest growing use case for eDiscovery technology and workflows and why?

The fastest growing use case for eDiscovery technology will be collecting text messages (including encrypted iMessages) on the “back end” at the enterprise level.  The current technology is flawed, expensive, and typically not proportional to any matter.  There is a significant need for a better solution.

Should hyperlinked files be treated as “modern attachments” and produced along with the emails containing the links?

Typically, no. Discovery challenges and concerns posed by hyperlinked files will persist in 2025 and beyond, likely serving as a catalyst for disputes regarding preservation and collection in litigation. Courts will continue to opine on and create new law on the standards for preserving, collecting, and producing hyperlinked files, and practitioners will continue to debate the issue.  But the technology changes in real time, and decisions relating to hyperlinked files may quickly become obsolete.

What do you think will be the biggest eDiscovery related trend that we will see organizations address in 2025 and why?

The biggest trend our team is seeing at Redgrave is the increased need for exceptional eDiscovery and Information Law talent.  It is clear to us that eDiscovery will become even more difficult in 2025 and beyond.  Data volume will continue to grow, the variety of data sources will keep proliferating, and the velocity of change will continue to accelerate, necessitating specialized eDiscovery counsel and providers.

What do you think is the eDiscovery challenge that not enough people in the industry are talking about and why don’t you think more people talk about it?

A key challenge that comes to mind is the continued uptick in “discovery on discovery,” as courts express frustration with corporations' inability to effectively and efficiently manage the discovery process and meet obligations and deadlines.  Corporations that proactively engage high-quality and experienced discovery counsel with sophisticated legal and technical expertise will be well prepared to avoid this challenge and see great value in engaging specialized counsel.

More information about the eDiscovery Today 2025 State of the Industry Report can be found here.