ClariLegal

             Scope, Procure & Manage
                     LITIGATION SERVICES

Case Studies 2017-11-10T19:36:27+00:00

Case Studies / White Papers

Discover more about ClariLegal through research, whitepapers, case studies, press releases, and more.

Case Studies

A reputable law firm that is experienced in business litigation agreed to work with a client on a contingency fee basis, meaning the firm would only be paid upon winning the case. This alternative fee agreement meant that the law firm had to gain full control of all efforts and costs related to the matter, including improving their document review workflow by decreasing the number of hours lawyers and staff spent reviewing documents.

The law firm decided to find a vendor through the ClariLegal vendor management platform to source a portion of their litigation work with confidence. ClariLegal allowed them to select a vendor whose bid for the work was the best service offering at a value price.

With the project underway, the vendor found a few issues when processing and loading the law firm’s data into their review tool. To its advantage, the vendor was able to use the ClariLegal Discussion Board within the ClariLegal Task Management Module to quickly communicate with the associate, paralegal, and the partners involved in the case at the law firm.

Upon receiving the vendor’s communication, the firm was able to identify a gap in their understanding of the technical aspects of processing their data and the vendor’s product workflow. A resource from the ClariLegal Concierge Desk (CLCD) worked with the associate to diagnose the issue and come up with a solution. The associate then communicated the solution to the vendor via the discussion board, resulting in solution implementation in a timely manner.

Both the law firm and the vendor benefited from using the ClariLegal application to stay on the same page and resolve a potentially large issue early on. With the transparency provided by the project tracking and discussion board features in the ClariLegal application and a little extra help from the CLCD, the law firm and vendor were able to efficiently collaborate to find and implement a solution. Together they handled an issue that would have significantly impacted the quality of work and increase the amount of money being spent.

A large investment firm was involved in a substantial and complex lawsuit related to one of the customers in its portfolios. When it came time to choose a vendor to perform the work that needed to be sourced, they had numerous significant issues. Two of those major issues was the loss of responsive evidence and a suspicion that the vendor was overcharging them by double or more than what current market rates were for the work being done. These issues negatively impacted both the investment firm and their customer.

These issues were significant enough that the firm decided it was time to find a new vendor, but they had been using their preferred provider for so long that they didn’t know where to begin to look for a new vendor. After calling almost a dozen reputable law firms they had worked with asking for recommendations, they compiled a list of 20 vendors and spent the next two months in an intentional vendor selection process to find the right vendor for them. Luckily for them at the time, they end up picking a great vendor. Their relationship was strong and lasted many years, and the investment firm even paid for the vendor to set up shop inside of their office in an effort to make their services even more superior.

Years later, during a litigation involving another client, the firm realized that this vendor had become complacent and was charging them two or three times more than other vendors for the same work. The firm addressed this issue of overcharging to the vendor, but the vendor elected not make any adjustments to their prices and fees. The vendor chose to do this because the vendor knew the amount of time and energy that goes into finding a replacement vendor, and they were certain the investment firm would rather overpay than begin a new vendor search.

However, what the vendor did not realize was that the investment firm would turn to ClariLegal. Through ClariLegal, the firm was able to get bids from five vetted vendors in one day by just posting a scope of work. The firm was able to select the vendor that best met their requirements at a price that was 70{8db45e278ded27f6327fa3d2edd76e40e3a905a297a32f1417b593d648816f9a} less than their previous vendor.

A law firm working for a corporate client had a relatively simple litigation service job with a strict deadline that they needed to source. Over the course of three days, the firm called four familiar vendors and after a total of 83 back and forth communications they received bids for the work.

The firm was shocked to find that the most expensive bid was almost double than what the lowest bid was, and that the vendor who had placed the lowest bid was from a more reputable firm that offered better services.

The law firm decided to select the vendor who placed the lowest bid, who also had the best value proposition, and through another 21 back and forth communications to refine the scope and negotiate the specific details of the work, the work was able to be completed.

A short time later, a nearly identical job came along, but this time instead of using their previous methods of searching for the right vendor, the law firm decided to find one through ClariLegal. Within an hour the scope of work was defined and the firm started receiving bids . After only 6 hours they had received a number of competitive bids from qualified vendors. Using the method of blind bidding, all vendors put their best foot forward to win the business. When the law firm selected one of the vendors through ClariLegal, the scope, requirements and logistics were already worked out.

Because of ClariLegal’s organized and efficient vendor management platform, the firm was able to get the job done quickly for a better price while having full control of the work being done. The firm was at ease knowing they were working with a vendor with the right skillset. Furthermore, ClariLegal’s vendor management tools allowed them to promptly communicate clearly and with transparency.

A reputable law firm that is very experienced in business litigation agreed to work with a client on a contingency fee basis, meaning that they would be paid upon winning the case. Due to the nature of the alternative fee agreement, the law firm needed to gain full control of the efforts and costs related to the matter. This also included improving their document review process to reduce the number of hours their lawyers and staff spent reviewing documents.

A portion of the litigation service work was to be sourced, however, the law firm was relatively new to advanced eDiscovery products and vendors. They needed a vendor and tool set that was low costing and simultaneously facilitate their implementation of improved document review workflow. To find a vendor whose bid for the work was the best service offered at the best value price, the law firm utilized ClariLegal.

Once a vendor was selected from the vendor bid submissions on ClariLegal, the vendor and lead associate of the firm were able to review the statement of work that was created from the job description and job scope within the ClariLegal application. A member of the ClariLegal Concierge Desk (CLCD) assisted the lead associate in working with the vendor to create a workflow training session using the vendor’s hosted review tool that was targeted to the specific needs of the law firm. The training only took an hour and resulted in a simplified workflow that reduced the number of hours spent on document review, while ensuring that nothing of relevance was missed by anyone reviewing the documents in the firm. By finding a vendor through ClariLegal, the firm estimated that they saved 100 hours of document review at an hourly rate of $500 per hour, resulting in a total savings of $50,000.

Through ClariLegal, the law firm was able to meet its goal of reducing outside vendor expenses and internal review costs. They were able to compare and contrast the experience and expertise of the CLCD to achieve the desired results. With a well-defined scope of work and ClariLegal’s vetting vendor process,the firm knew throughout the project they were matched and working with an excellent, quality vendor who delivered their needs while saving them time and money.

A reputable law firm that is highly experienced in business litigation agreed to work with a client on a contingency fee basis, meaning that they would be paid upon winning the case. Because of the alternative fee agreement, the law firm wanted to be sure that had full control on the efforts and costs related to the matter, which included improving their document review workflow to reduce the number of hours their staff spent on it.

A portion of the litigation service work was to be sourced, however, the law firm was relatively new to advanced eDiscovery products and vendors. The firm needed a vendor and tool set that was low costing while simultaneously implementing an improved document review workflow. The firm had a relationship with a local vendor and an associate from the firm asked them for their cost of the work. Four days later, the vendor came back with what seemed like a reasonable estimate of about $4,000 for data processing and hosted review. However, a partner within the firm had a hunch that the estimate didn’t reflect a value price and told the associate to call ClariLegal to obtain some more bids on the work.

Together, the associate and a member for the ClariLegal Concierge Desk (CLCD) scoped the work within the ClariLegal application. The ClariLegal resource worked with the associate to learn more about the case and the challenges that the firm was facing with it in order to best describe the job and outcome that was needed. The process of having a CLCD consultation, job scope, and job submission was able to be done by the associate within a half hour.

Within 24 hours the law firm received four bids on the work, and they ranged from $1,000 to $6,000. After reviewing vendor pricing and capabilities with apples to apples comparisons within the ClariLegal application, the associate was able to efficiently narrow down the bids to two vendor proposals. The $1,000 bid was selected, as that vendor had a great service offering at a value price. This complete vendor selection process took under one hour and both the partner and the associate were very comfortable with their vendor decision.

By going through ClariLegal, the job was able to get done quickly, and the law firm was confident with their selected vendor. The vendor mangement tools within ClariLegal allowed for prompt and clear communication with the vendor, the law firm and associate were given true transaction transparency while reducing time spent, saving money, and maintaining full control of the situation.