an attorney must be prepared to be demanding, outrageous, irreverent, blasphemous, a rogue, a renegade, and a hated, isolated, and lonely person

What do you do for a living?

    I have been, for the last year, working as a Document Review Attorney.

What does that mean?

    According to an article on Zippia, "If you choose to work in this field, you'll find yourself examining documents and records for cases with a high volume of papers from discovery. You'll need to ensure that all pertinent information that needs to be processed for use in court is highlighted. You'll also need to be fast yet efficient and accurate since an incorrectly marked document could jeopardize a legal case. 

    Law firms generally hire document review attorneys on a contract basis. Some projects could last only weeks, while others could last an entire year. Therefore, this type of work offers great flexibility for both new and experienced attorneys to practice law while earning some extra income. To work in this field, you will need a Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree and License to practice law. Experience with document review workflows and proficiency with eDiscovery software is also helpful."

 

What makes someone a good Document Review Attorney?

    According to an article on LHH, key attributes of a successful candidate are:

1. An eye for detail as he or she will scan hundreds upon hundreds of documents and must be able to discern which documents are pertinent.
2. EDRM (Electronic Discovery Reference Model) skills, which refers to the various stages of the eDiscovery process.
3. Strong computer skills, specifically in document review software, are necessary.
4. Great communication skills.
5. Project management skills to stay organized and move from task to task as asked.
6. The ability to work efficiently to maximize time.
7. A positive attitude towards a task that’s time-consuming and sometimes tedious.

What exactly are you doing, on the average day?

    According to an article on Indeed,

    "Document reviewers might investigate emails, text messages, contracts and spreadsheets. These professionals often track their findings by highlighting important information, placing tabs in sections, writing summaries and developing spreadsheets or charts. Reviewers typically prioritize the following factors:

• Responsiveness: The document meets production demands.
• Privilege: The document is available as evidence outside of an attorney-client relationship.
• Relevance: The document presents valuable information about a case.
• Confidentiality: The document doesn't contain information that compromises a client's privacy or business."

Do you like it?

    Sure. It's flexible (work any hours within the "review window" as long as the key hours [usually 10AM-2PM] are covered), casual (jammies, workout gear, and blankets as needed), and not difficult.

Have you hit the ceiling, or is there room for growth?

    There are some opportunities available, for sure. One is Quality Assurance, which is what I was hired to do on my current project. After the initial review is done, documents are sorted for potential errors. QA goes through those subsequent sort results, to verify the initial review. 

    One can also be hired directly by the agency, to work on various projects. That is generally a full-time gig. After some time, one may be promoted to assistant Project Manager, and then Project Manager. I don't have much interest in direct hire, because it seems to be trading a little more money for a lot more work. This assessment is subject to change, of course.

 

What's the best part of the actual job?

    I like feeling confident and expert, doing something well, and knowing that my work is 100% worthy of the money I'm earning.

 

What's the worst part of the actual job?

    Review protocols vary from project to project, and the differences can be confusing. Consider an email thread with various attachments coming from different people. Some jobs direct that we review each document "on its face," with no reference to the others. Other jobs require the opposite, that each email thread and its attachments be considered a "family," and the documents' relevance and privilege be considered in relation to the other family members. It can be really hard to flip back and forth between these styles of assessment, and it can also be hard to follow the rules when they don't seem to make sense to the situation. (Like calling a restaurant menu—been attached to an otherwise relevant email thread so the participants can order lunch for a meeting—"responsive" when it's clearly not.) 

additional questions? Leave a comment and I'll try to answer.

 

[the title quotation is by Clarence Darrow]