Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work with a lot of doc reviewers and I don't feel like it's that dead end of a job. The good ones do move into other areas.

I agree. People love to rag on them on this site. I know quite a few who have moved jobs. Ones who really know their stuff become e-discovery attorneys who manage the whole process, and they can be really in demand. Not a lot of attorneys want to do it or understand it, but they are absolutely needed. A good one can save you from screwing up discovery in big important cases.

Others move on to become associates, maybe not in Biglaw, but very respectable firms, and from there you move up. I know a former doc reviewer who is a partner at an Amlaw100 (became associate at a small firm, then partner, then firm got acquired by Amlaw 100 firm).

I don't think people are knocking doc review on its on. It's the posters who, in the past, have started threads claiming that they cannot do anything else, need unemployment, state life is hopeless, etc. I remember a few of those from the past few months. I started in doc review when I came to DC. It paid well bc I did bilingual review. It wasn't something that I considered permanent but I worked on multiple projects to save money until I could do something else. Doc review is a job just like any other, and if you're out there earning your pay check good for you! That said, I don't think that the vast majority of doc reviewers plan to be there long term. Those career folks are the slim minority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work with a lot of doc reviewers and I don't feel like it's that dead end of a job. The good ones do move into other areas.

I agree. People love to rag on them on this site. I know quite a few who have moved jobs. Ones who really know their stuff become e-discovery attorneys who manage the whole process, and they can be really in demand. Not a lot of attorneys want to do it or understand it, but they are absolutely needed. A good one can save you from screwing up discovery in big important cases.

Others move on to become associates, maybe not in Biglaw, but very respectable firms, and from there you move up. I know a former doc reviewer who is a partner at an Amlaw100 (became associate at a small firm, then partner, then firm got acquired by Amlaw 100 firm).

My SIL was not in doc review, but her practice area, skills, and personality helped her when she wanted to move on to not practicing - she's managing what I'd call the digital aspect of practice at her current firm.

If you are in this field/industry, then understanding what TAR/AI/ML is going to output, where its weaknesses lie, and keeping on top of emerging technology could put you in a decent spot - either in a firm or even in-house in some industries I bet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.

This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.

Clients don’t care. Most doc reviewers jobs will be eliminated . What do those people do then ?

Well, that's one good thing about being a lawyer, providing you are barred somewhere - you can always hang out your shingle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.

This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.

Clients don’t care. Most doc reviewers jobs will be eliminated . What do those people do then ?

Maybe, but a court of law cares. TAR would never fly as final doc production. The legal system protects its own.

Anonymous wrote:I work with a lot of doc reviewers and I don't feel like it's that dead end of a job. The good ones do move into other areas.

I agree. People love to rag on them on this site. I know quite a few who have moved jobs. Ones who really know their stuff become e-discovery attorneys who manage the whole process, and they can be really in demand. Not a lot of attorneys want to do it or understand it, but they are absolutely needed. A good one can save you from screwing up discovery in big important cases.

Others move on to become associates, maybe not in Biglaw, but very respectable firms, and from there you move up. I know a former doc reviewer who is a partner at an Amlaw100 (became associate at a small firm, then partner, then firm got acquired by Amlaw 100 firm).

I work with a lot of doc reviewers and I don't feel like it's that dead end of a job. The good ones do move into other areas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Presumably they will do whatever other people do when their job disappears - get another job, go on disability (if applicable, not sure how it would be), live off relatives, social security if they are old enough etc. New lawyers graduating who before would become doc reviewers will either get other law jobs or leave the field of law. I don’t understand why it’s a huge concern? That’s how it works in every industry.

and what do law schools say about job prospects and pay if their graduates are driving for Uber or working as temp legal assistants?

The truth unless they want to get sued. And then prospective students would decide if they want to risk those odds or not. If there are less people going to law school it’s hardly a crisis for society - we have plenty of lawyers as is; and if some lower tier law schools fold or some law school jobs get cut as a result, once again not a big scale societal problem and all those people will either get a job elsewhere (legal or otherwise) or find someone else to support them (either family members or taxpayers.)

Anonymous wrote:Presumably they will do whatever other people do when their job disappears - get another job, go on disability (if applicable, not sure how it would be), live off relatives, social security if they are old enough etc. New lawyers graduating who before would become doc reviewers will either get other law jobs or leave the field of law. I don’t understand why it’s a huge concern? That’s how it works in every industry.

and what do law schools say about job prospects and pay if their graduates are driving for Uber or working as temp legal assistants?

Presumably they will do whatever other people do when their job disappears - get another job, go on disability (if applicable, not sure how it would be), live off relatives, social security if they are old enough etc. New lawyers graduating who before would become doc reviewers will either get other law jobs or leave the field of law. I don’t understand why it’s a huge concern? That’s how it works in every industry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.

This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.

Clients don’t care. Most doc reviewers jobs will be eliminated . What do those people do then ?

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.

This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.

Anonymous wrote:Disability? Because you cannot learn another skill? That’s some BS mentality right there. Find another job. Learn a different area. Jesus. Why are people so lazy??

Lots of people do scams . SSA or unemployment for just people who don’t want to work. Now add in large number of unemployable lawyers who have no chance except going back to school

Disability? Because you cannot learn another skill? That’s some BS mentality right there. Find another job. Learn a different area. Jesus. Why are people so lazy??

Plus to save money’s clients will demand clawback agreements and that elongated the need for real privilege reviews

Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.

Clients will demand it to cut costs . TAR can do dummy priv reviews