The Potential Pitfalls and Risks When Clients Collect Their Data: Self-Collection Risks in eDiscovery

Data has become a key element in resolving legal disputes, particularly during the discovery process. Electronic discovery (eDiscovery) —the identification, preservation, and production of electronically stored information (ESI)—is a complex, technical process governed by strict legal standards.

Despite this, many clients attempt to collect ESI themselves without professional oversight, risking significant errors. While self-collection might seem like a cost-effective or convenient option, it introduces significant risks that can undermine the credibility of evidence, violate discovery obligations, and jeopardize a case.

This article dives into these risks and examines why professional forensic collection is essential for ensuring defensibility during litigation.

What is Self-Collection in Ediscovery?

Self-collection refers to the practice of clients independently gathering data for legal proceedings rather than engaging legal or forensic experts. This often involves the client searching their systems for relevant ESI, such as emails, documents, or other electronic files, and delivering this information as part of the discovery response.

While it may seem straightforward, self-collection often fails to account for the complexity of modern IT environments and the rigorous standards required during the discovery process. Missteps, whether due to a lack of technical expertise or an incomplete understanding of discovery obligations, can lead to discovery failures that harm the client's legal position.

Pitfalls and Risks of Self-Collection in Ediscovery

1. Unintentional Data Alteration

One of the primary risks of self-collection is the inadvertent alteration of metadata, which is critical for establishing the authenticity and integrity of electronically stored information. Actions as simple as opening a document, copying files, or transferring data without forensic tools can modify metadata fields, such as file creation or modification dates.

• Risk: Courts demand defensibility in how data is handled. The Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) requires parties to demonstrate a reasonable inquiry into the accuracy and integrity of ESI. If metadata is altered, the court noted in several cases that such mishandling could lead to sanctions or exclusion of evidence.
• Example: A client forwards emails to an external account for easier review, unknowingly overwriting key metadata. Without forensic collection, these changes might be irreversible, undermining the evidence's admissibility.

2. Failure to Identify All Relevant ESI

Modern organizations store data across various platforms, including servers, cloud systems, mobile devices, and backups. Without a deep understanding of these environments, clients risk missing critical information during self-collection.

For instance, data stored in an opposing party's computer system or within legacy archives may remain undiscovered without a professional discovery search.

• Risk: Incomplete identification of relevant ESI can result in missed discovery deadlines, allegations of spoliation, or even adverse rulings.
• Example: A custodian self-collection process might overlook chat logs or system-generated files that contain responsive documents vital to the case. The opposing party could use this oversight to claim non-compliance.

3. Non-Compliance with Legal Standards

eDiscovery is governed by strict legal frameworks, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which require that parties conduct a reasonable inquiry into the completeness and accuracy of data collection. While professional forensic collection is the standard for ensuring defensibility, self-collection is the exception, not the rule.

• Risk: Courts are increasingly scrutinizing parties that attempt to sidestep established discovery obligations, often resulting in sanctions or adverse rulings.
• Example: In a notable case, a client relied on self-collection to fulfill their discovery response. The court noted that this approach fell short of reasonable inquiry standards, as key responsive documents were overlooked.

4. Privilege and Confidentiality Breaches

During the discovery response, it is important to filter out privileged or confidential information before producing data. Self-collection, without legal oversight, increases the likelihood of inadvertently disclosing sensitive information.

• Risk: Failure to adequately protect privilege can harm the client’s case and may violate privacy regulations or ethical duties.
• Example: A company produces internal communications as part of its discovery obligations but fails to identify attorney-client privileged content, which the opposing party subsequently uses to its advantage.

5. Security Vulnerabilities

Handling data during self-collection without secure tools or proper protocols can expose sensitive information to unauthorized access, theft, or tampering.

• Risk: Cyberattacks or accidental exposure can compromise the client’s position and lead to regulatory penalties.
• Example: A client transfers discovery data via an unsecured email, exposing it to interception. Forensic collection would have ensured secure handling and transfer protocols.

6. Bias and Lack of Objectivity

Clients often have an inherent bias when selecting data for collection, whether intentional or not. This bias can lead to the exclusion of potentially relevant ESI, creating gaps in the evidence presented.

• Risk: Opposing counsel may argue that incomplete data production was deliberate, leading to motions to compel or sanctions.
• Example: A custodian self-collection approach excludes certain emails labeled “irrelevant” by the client. When these emails surface later through the opposing party’s discovery search, the court notes the bias and imposes penalties.

7. Costly Re-Collections and Delays

When data collected via self-collection is deemed inadmissible or incomplete, re-collection by experts becomes necessary. This not only delays the case but also significantly increases costs.

• Risk: Missed discovery deadlines and increased litigation expenses.
• Example: A client submits files with altered metadata due to self-collection. The court orders forensic collection to ensure compliance, adding time and expense to the process.

Self-Collection vs. Professional Collection

The differences between self-collection and professional data collection in eDiscovery are significant and can have a profound impact on the integrity, completeness, and admissibility of evidence. Understanding these distinctions highlights why professional expertise is essential.

1. Expert Tools and Techniques

• Self-Collection: Clients often rely on basic tools, such as copying files onto external drives or using built-in search functions, which are insufficient for comprehensive ediscovery. These methods can unintentionally alter metadata or overlook key data sources.
• Professional Collection: Forensic experts use specialized, court-approved tools designed for ediscovery. These tools ensure defensible data extraction while preserving metadata, file paths, and timestamps. Advanced software can also recover deleted files and analyze fragmented data, which would otherwise remain undetected.

2. Data Integrity Preservation

• Self-Collection: During self-collection, metadata—such as creation dates, authorship, and access times—can be easily altered, even unknowingly.
  For instance, copying files from one location to another can overwrite key metadata, leading to disputes about the evidence’s authenticity in court.
• Professional Collection: Professionals adhere to strict forensic protocols to preserve the chain of custody and data integrity. They document every action taken during collection and utilize write-blocking tools to prevent inadvertent changes to data. This level of detail ensures that collected evidence remains admissible and defensible under legal scrutiny.

3. Legal and Technical Expertise

• Self-Collection: Most clients lack familiarity with the legal standards governing e-discovery, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), which require defensible and complete data production. Clients risk missing obligations or producing incomplete datasets without this expertise, leading to sanctions.
• Professional Collection: Forensic experts understand both legal and technical requirements. They ensure compliance with court rules, state regulations, and privacy laws (e.g., GDPR or HIPAA). Their technical skills allow them to identify all relevant data, even from complex sources like encrypted drives or cloud-based platforms.

4. Comprehensive Data Discovery

• Self-Collection: Clients may fail to search all potential sources of electronically stored information (ESI).

Commonly overlooked areas include:

• Backup systems and archived files.
• Cloud storage platforms like Google Drive or Microsoft OneDrive.
• Hidden, encrypted, or deleted data.
• Professional Collection: Experts employ targeted search methodologies, advanced filters, and keyword mapping to ensure all relevant ESI is collected. Their tools can identify files across various sources, including mobile devices, servers, and email archives, leaving no data undiscovered.

5. Reduced Risk of Errors

• Self-Collection: Errors during self-collection—such as overwriting files, missing critical evidence, or failing to document the collection process—are common and costly. These mistakes can lead to evidence exclusion, court sanctions, or an inability to defend the collection’s validity.
• Professional Collection: Professionals minimize risks by following standardized processes, documenting the chain of custody, and verifying the accuracy of the collected data. This defensible approach ensures the evidence can withstand challenges during litigation.

Why is Professional Data Collection Essential?

When clients attempt to self-collect electronic data for eDiscovery purposes, they expose themselves to numerous risks, including data corruption, incompleteness, and failure to meet legal standards. Professional data collection mitigates these risks through precision, compliance, and expertise.

1. Maintaining Data Integrity

Preserving the integrity of electronically stored information (ESI) is critical in legal proceedings. Forensic experts rely on advanced tools and methodologies to ensure all data remains intact and admissible:

• Preservation of Metadata: Metadata, such as file creation dates, user modifications, and access logs, can easily be altered or lost during improper data collection. Professionals use specialized tools to ensure metadata remains unaltered.
• Defensible Collection Methods: Experts follow established forensic protocols that document the chain of custody, ensuring the data’s authenticity can be verified in court.
• Use of Certified Tools: Forensic tools are specifically designed for defensible data acquisition, reducing the chances of errors that could render evidence inadmissible.

2. Comprehensive Discovery Search

Self-collection often leads to missed evidence due to a lack of expertise in locating and identifying all relevant data.
Professionals address this challenge through:

• Advanced Search Capabilities: Forensic tools can process extensive datasets using search terms, advanced filters, and keyword mapping to locate critical files.
• Discovery Across Diverse Data Sources: Experts have the tools and knowledge to access ESI stored across multiple systems, including:
• Cloud storage platforms (e.g., Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive).
• Backup servers and archives.
• Hidden files, deleted data, or encrypted storage.
• Identification of Anomalies: Professionals can detect anomalies or red flags that may point to altered or concealed information, ensuring nothing is overlooked.

3. Ensuring Compliance with Legal Standards

Failure to meet legal requirements during data collection can result in sanctions, evidence being deemed inadmissible, or even case dismissal.

Ediscovery experts mitigate these risks through:

• Understanding Discovery Obligations: Professionals have in-depth knowledge of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) and state-specific guidelines for eDiscovery. They ensure data is collected, preserved, and produced in compliance with these legal standards.
• Documenting the Process: A defensible, well-documented collection process ensures the evidence can withstand scrutiny during litigation.
• Minimizing Legal Risks: Experts ensure all relevant ESI is identified and avoid costly oversights that could result in spoliation claims or non-compliance penalties.

4. Protecting Privilege and Confidentiality

Self-collection can inadvertently expose sensitive or privileged information, increasing the risk of waiver or breaches.

Professional data collectors protect confidentiality through:

• Privilege Filters: Experts apply tools and techniques to identify and segregate privileged communications or legally protected information.
• Controlled Access to Data: Collection methods restrict unauthorized personnel from accessing sensitive files, reducing the risk of data leaks or mishandling.
• Compliance with Privacy Laws: Professionals are well-versed in data privacy regulations (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA) and ensure that confidential data is handled appropriately.

5. Avoiding Discovery Failures

Improper self-collection can result in critical mistakes that jeopardize a case.

Professionals help avoid discovery failures through:

• End-to-End Process Documentation: Experts document every step of the collection process, including tools used, timeframes, and methodologies, ensuring complete transparency.
• Reducing the Risk of Sanctions: A defensible collection reduces the chances of evidence being challenged, minimizing the risk of court sanctions or adverse rulings.
• Handling Complex Data Environments: Professionals are equipped to deal with large volumes of ESI, diverse file formats, and emerging challenges such as mobile or social media data collection.

Conclusion

Self-collection in eDiscovery may seem cost-effective, but it carries significant risks, such as missed evidence, altered metadata, or failure to meet legal standards. Without technical expertise and proper tools, clients can make critical errors that weaken their case and fall short of their professional and ethical duties to ensure accurate and complete data preservation.

Professional data collection addresses these risks through technical precision and legal compliance. Forensic experts preserve data integrity, locate all relevant ESI, and document the chain of custody, ensuring the evidence remains defensible and admissible in court.

While professional collection may involve upfront costs, it prevents costly mistakes, re-collection efforts, and legal sanctions. Investing in experts from the start protects the evidence, the client’s credibility, and the case’s success.

Need Further Assistance?

We are here to help—schedule a call with Perin Discovery!