Automated legal sensemaking: the centrality of relevance and intentionality

Introduction: In a perfect world, discovery would ideally be conducted by the senior litigator who is responsible for developing and fully understanding all nuances of their client’s legal strategy. Of course today we must deal with the explosion of electronically stored information (ESI) that never is less than tens-of-thousands of documents in small cases and now increasingly involves multi-million-document populations for internal corporate investigations and litigations. Therefore scalable processes and technologies are required as a substitute for the authority’s judgment. The approaches taken have typically either substituted large teams of surrogate human reviewers using vastly simplified issue coding reference materials or employed increasingly sophisticated computational resources with little focus on quality metrics to insure retrieval consistent with the legal goal. What is required is a system (people, process, and technology) that replicates and automates the senior litigator’s human judgment. In this paper we utilize 15 years of sensemaking research to establish the minimum acceptable basis for conducting a document review that meets the needs of a legal proceeding. There is no substitute for a rigorous characterization of the explicit and tacit goals of the senior litigator. Once a process has been established for capturing the authority’s relevance criteria, we argue that literal translation of requirements into technical specifications does not properly account for the activities or states-of-affairs of interest. Having only a data warehouse of written records, it is also necessary to discover the intentions of actors involved in textual communications. We present quantitative results for a process and technology approach that automates effective legal sensemaking

Evidence on the Audit Risk Model: Do Auditors Increase Audit Fees in the Presence of Internal Control Deficiencies?

The article discusses the study of determining whether audit risk model is descriptive of what occurs in the auditing practice or if the relationship between fees and internal control deficiencies (ICDs) suggest that audit enterprises exert more effort in auditing firms that impart ICDs. The study examines the internal controls over financial reporting (ICOFR), generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), audit risk model, audit fees and sections of Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The study found out that audit fees are significantly higher for firms disclosing material weakness

How Passengers of Low Cost Carriers Feel the Pressure: Pricing Tactics and Other Stories

Low cost carriers (LCCs) market their flights as low cost and aim to garner as much additional revenue as possible from ancillary services such as baggage and priority boarding. Therefore, airlines encourage customers’ purchase of these services. On account of this and other airline practices, the European Union introduced legislation to address areas of concern to protect consumers. Airlines’ response to the requirement for clarity in pricing at the outset and throughout the transaction is questionable. They have responded to the legal requirement that all optional extras should only be presented to the consumer on an ‘opt-in’ basis by using ‘grey’ Web design patterns such as the ‘must-opt’. Using verbal protocols, this study examines consumers’ perceptions of two LCCs’ level of compliance with the relevant European legislation