March Madness has been electric in Richmond, Virginia. Two Cinderella teams in the Sweet Sixteen. Now, one in the Final Four. Has that happened to any other city the size of Richmond? I didn’t bother to Google it because I really didn’t want to know. It is enough that it happened to us. The University of Richmond Spiders lost a tough game against Kansas, but the college basketball nation has been blown away by the VCU Rams. No matter what happens on Saturday night against Butler (another great team, but not really a Cinderella anymore), Richmond, Virginia will be rockin’.
I confess that I’ve not been a stalwart fan of our hometown heroes, and saw my first game the other night in the round of 32, when VCU shamed Purdue and staked its claim
as a true Cinderella in 2011 (take that, Mr. Vitale). What amazed me the most was that this is not a team with a Jimmer Fredette, a player long in the national spotlight that can nearly carry a team on his shoulders. This is a team. Certainly, we’ve got some great players. I love Joey Rodriguez – fast, athletic, incredible vision, completely unselfish. But what makes this team win is that it plays as a team.
So, what’s the hook, you ask? What in the world can Richmond’s Cinderella teams have to do with e-discovery? The answer, as with many of my posts, lies in my manufacturing past. Having worked in a factory, one learns to appreciate specialization. To create a semiconductor chip or a computer module, one does not dump a pile of parts (or chemicals) onto a table, grab an engineer or technician, and say, “get to work.” Manufacturing is the perfect example of specialization at its best. All of the raw materials 
and component parts staged in perfect array; complex automated equipment performing singular tasks in perfect harmony; expertly trained operators, technicians and engineers performing discrete tasks; each and every participant in the process critical and interdependent. That is teamwork based on specialization.
Then I became a litigator and was exposed to the myth that a great lawyer can do everything. Sure, there are some excellent general practitioners out there, writing wills, handling a criminal case or two, forming a business, and settling a divorce. But every one of those generalists knows where his or her limits lie, and, when the stakes are high, they’ll refer their best clients out to a specialist. Personally, I started out as a generalist, and many associates do, dabbling in commercial, IP and products liability litigation. Over the years, I specialized, focusing on products, and then on tires, and then on discovery, ultimately dedicating my career to e-discovery. I would never think to counsel someone on an irrevocable trust or handle a criminal matter. Yet, time and time again, I will see attorney profiles listing, among a number of other specialties, e-discovery.
We have passed the point where e-discovery can be thought of as a sideline. Determining how to extract information from a SQL database in a “reasonably usable format” complete with key metadata is a far cry from thumbing through file folders for important e-mails. You might not need a specialist to notice white-out on a memorandum, but you’d have no trouble hiring a handwriting expert to authenticate a signature. Understanding whether electronically stored information (ESI) is in its original condition is closer to authenticating handwriting than spotting correction tape.
Just like the VCU Rams, a litigation team functions best when the members focus on their respective strengths, operate unselfishly to accomplish the joint objective, leaving aside personal considerations in favor of the client’s best interests. I think I would have been an excellent trial attorney had my career taken that path. But you should not hire an e-discovery lawyer to voir dire your jury or cross-examine the critical witness in your most important case. When it comes to e-discovery, however, you definitely need a Joey Rodriguez on the team.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Subscribe to our blog with