Document Reviewer Job Description

Document Review Jobs in the Era of E-Discovery

Most documents reside in computer databases due to the advances in technology. Document reviewers spend most of their days in front of a computer screen, instead of sifting through paper documents. The document reviewer's role has expanded due to the advent of e-discovery.

A document reviewer's salary is dependent on a number of factors. Document reviewers can make more money by working overtime. Large cities like New York, Washington D.C. and Los Angeles pay the highest rates.

Foreign language fluency projects may pay more. The document review world is evolving as a sub-specialties and a career path within the document review industry begins to emerge. Document review has been criticized as tedious, mind-numbing, sweatshop work with little chance for advancement, low prestige, a lack of steady work, stigmand a work atmosphere where breaks are limited and speed is monitored.

The status of document review work is changing. Roles have become more complex as a result of e-discovery. Document review jobs have a good work-life balance.

Editorial Procedure for Reviewers' Decisions in Alternative Journal Evaluation

If the reviewer doesn't think the manuscript is suitable for the journal to which it has been submitted, they should consider whether the manuscript is suitable for publication in an alternative Royal Society of Chemistry journal. The editor can accept or reject papers. The editor's duty is to see that the authors and reviewers agree on the final product.

The reviewers may need to be consulted again if necessary, but only when necessary. The editor will inform the authors when a paper is recommended for rejection. If the decision to reject is unfair, the authors have the right to appeal.

The editor can grant appeals. In such cases the editor will request a letter detailing the reason for appeal, as well as a full response to the reviewers' reports. The manuscript will be sent to a senior reviewer who has not previously evaluated the manuscript and who will give a final opinion the manuscript.

Reviewers and Editors

It is competent. Reviewers who realize that they have limited knowledge of the manuscript have a responsibility to make their knowledge clear to the editor. Reviewers should only accept assignments if they have the expertise to give an authoritative assessment of a manuscript.

A reviewer without the necessary expertise is at risk of rejecting a submission with significant deficiencies or recommending acceptance of a paper. The reviewer should decline the review in such cases. There is a conflict of interest.

The review system should be designed to minimize bias on the reviewer's part. If reviewers have any interest that might interfere with an objective review, they should either decline the role of reviewer or tell the editor how to address it. Reviewers are required to sign disclosure forms that are similar to those signed by authors.

responsiveness and timelines. Reviewers are expected to act promptly, follow instructions for completing a review and submit in a timely manner. The review process is undermined by failure to do so.

The review should be completed within the time requested. If the review is not possible, the reviewer should decline to do it or inquire if some accommodations can be made. Peer review in scientific journals is performed in a way in which the names of the reviewers are unknown to the authors, but the names of the authors are known to reviewers and editors.

Automated First Pass Review of Legal Documents

Attorneys who understand the legal and factual issues in the litigation can make the necessary judgment calls as to privilege and responsiveness. Contract attorneys or paralegals are often employed to help reduce cost. The review process can be lengthy.

The legal team can conduct a first pass review to analyze documents for relevance and code. The data is loaded into a database that allows litigation teams to easily locate key documents at every stage of the litigation process. Is the information responsive to the requests of the opposing parties?

Is the information responsive to the request for production? Document reviewers might also tag documents that contain crucial information to the case and are responsive. The document must be kept out of production.

The legal team is not obligated to turn over a document that discusses a trade secret if it discusses a chocolate bar recipe. The document reviewer will look at the document to see if it contains confidential information. The reviewer will decide if the document should be redacted to protect the client's confidential work product or if it should be excluded from production altogether.

The review team can also look at the information to see if it relates to legal issues in the case. Key documents may be related to key players who may testify about the documents or identify other subjective information. The legal team can begin to gain a better understanding of the factual issues in a case, formulate legal theories and identify key witnesses to be deposed or called to testify based on the review and analysis of the documents in the collection.