AI-assisted review the court will accept.
The eDiscovery Counsel — in-house at a law department, in litigation support at a firm, or at an ALSP — is accountable to FRCP 26(g) (reasonable inquiry) and to the proportionality / cooperation principles under FRCP 26(b)(1). AI-assisted review (CAR / TAR / CAL / predictive coding) is now standard, but the defensibility evidence has to be assembled per matter. Without it, the AI cannot deploy at scale.
Talk to an eDiscovery solutions engineer · Read the defensible eDiscovery pillar · Read the Legal microsite
"AI-assisted review is the only way to handle modern volumes. Defending it to the judge is the deal-breaker."
"AI-assisted review is the only way to handle modern volumes. Defending it to the judge — workflow, sample sizes, recall, statistical methodology — is the deal-breaker." — eDiscovery Counsel
What TeamSync gives the eDiscovery counsel.
1. Defensible eDiscovery as a capability, not a workflow your team writes.
eDiscovery implements the EDRM workflow: legal-hold notice + acknowledgement, custodian collection with chain-of-custody hash, deduplication, threading, near-duplication, predictive-coding model training, CAL rounds, validation sampling, privilege QC, production with bates + load files.
2. Statistical defensibility evidence assembled per matter.
For predictive-coding matters, TeamSync produces the defensibility pack: workflow design, training-set composition, model methodology, recall + elusion estimates with sample sizes and confidence intervals, validation sample design and outcomes. The Sedona Conference TAR principles, FRCP 26(g), and Rio Tinto / Hyles standards all addressed by the same evidence.
3. Permissions-aware AI grounded across the matter and the firm corpus.
DocuTalk and Semantic Search ground reviewer questions in the matter, in prior matters, in firm precedent — within the matter's privilege walls. Reviewer becomes faster and more consistent without leaking outside the matter.
4. Agentic AI Workflow for the routine reviewer tasks.
Agentic AI Workflow runs the routine: privilege-screen drafts, responsive-tag suggestions, redaction-candidate flagging — each stage with reviewer override and audit. Reviewer time spent on judgement, not first-pass.
5. Audit ledger anchors every reviewer action and every model decision.
Reviewer decisions, model versions, prompt templates, calibration runs, validation sets — anchored in the Merkle audit ledger. Defensibility deposition answered from cryptographic record.
What changes for the eDiscovery counsel.
| Concern | What changes |
|---|---|
| Predictive-coding defensibility evidence | Generated, not assembled |
| Reviewer throughput | Materially higher with AI assist |
| Privilege QC quality | Higher recall, fewer claw-backs |
| Cross-matter institutional knowledge | Searchable + privilege-aware |
| Cost-per-GB reviewed | Materially lower |
Compliance frameworks served.
| Framework | Coverage |
|---|---|
| FRCP 26(g) (reasonable inquiry) | Workflow + statistical evidence |
| FRCP 26(b)(1) (proportionality) | Cost defensibility |
| FRE 502(b) (privilege protection) | Inadvertent disclosure protection |
| Sedona Conference TAR principles | Industry-aligned methodology |
| EDRM model | Workflow alignment |
| SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR Art. 17, HIPAA | Cross-vertical |
How TeamSync compares for AI-assisted review.
| Capability | TeamSync | Relativity / RelativityOne | Reveal | Everlaw | DISCO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictive coding / CAL with audit | ✅ | Relativity Active Learning | Reveal AI | Everlaw AI | DISCO AI |
| Statistical defensibility pack generated per matter | ✅ | Manual | Manual | Manual | Manual |
| Cryptographic audit on reviewer + model actions | ✅ Merkle | Standard log | Standard log | Standard log | Standard log |
| Permissions-aware AI grounded in matter + firm corpus | ✅ DocuTalk | Limited (matter-scoped) | Limited | Limited | Limited |
| Per-matter transparent pricing | ✅ | Per-GB + seats | Per-GB + seats | Per-GB | Per-GB |
Important: TeamSync coexists with Relativity, Reveal, Everlaw, and DISCO — those are the dominant review platforms. entry point for TeamSync: matters where statistical-defensibility automation, cryptographic audit on reviewer actions, and permissions-aware AI grounding across firm precedent matter at deal-close. Also for in-house legal departments running early-case-assessment ahead of vendor selection.
CTAs.
| If you are… | Do this |
|---|---|
| eDiscovery Counsel | Talk to a solutions engineer |
| Litigation Support Director | Read the defensible eDiscovery pillar |
| In-house Litigation Counsel | Read the AI-without-leakage use case |
| Conflicts Officer | Read the conflicts officer page |