Sign in Agent Mode
Categories
Your Saved List Become a Channel Partner Sell in AWS Marketplace Amazon Web Services Home Help

Reviews from AWS customer

1 AWS reviews
  • 5 star
    0
  • 1
  • 3 star
    0
  • 2 star
    0
  • 1 star
    0

External reviews

2 reviews
from

External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.


4-star reviews ( Show all reviews )

    SimardeepSingh

An user-friendly solution that provides fast and accurate processing capabilities

  • August 13, 2024
  • Review provided by PeerSpot

What is our primary use case?

I have a higher certification in Everlaw for managerial organization. We use Everlaw for everything, like processing documents, creating STRs, promoting documents, and using analytics. I support our review team with all these tasks in Everlaw.

What is most valuable?

The product is very user-friendly. When new employees join, they find Everlaw the easiest to learn among our different eDiscovery tools, such as Relativity, Canopy, and Nuix. It's simple to use, even for third-party uploads. Their support team is very good and resolves issues quickly. Everlaw is fast and accurate in processing. Producing documents is easy - we create and use a protocol for future productions. Processing errors in Everlaw can't be fixed, which is efficient.

We use the tool specifically for unitization in many projects. It's very easy for reviewers to use. Everlaw is improving daily, introducing new features like analytics and AI. Analytics in Everlaw runs by default when we process anything. We used AI to train the system for review in a project with five million records.

I think Everlaw's predictive coding tools are good. It's an AI feature that provides responsive documents. We train the model with 50 responsive or 50 non-responsive documents, and it uses that to pull out responsive documents and exclude non-responsive ones for reviewers. This is a great feature of the tool.

What needs improvement?

Everlaw could be less choosy about accepting control numbers for third-party loads. When uploading third-party loads, it currently needs two mandatory fields (like within date or end date or page count). I think the control number should be the only required field. Everlaw isn't used for Data Breach projects. For normal eDiscovery, we can use Everlaw, but most clients prefer Relativity.

The solution is doing well currently and doesn't need to improve much. However, to get more customers, they should lower their prices.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the product since 2017.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

In my organization, more than 150 reviewers use Everlaw for various projects. We create user accounts as needed but only provide access to relevant data. The tool is scalable, and I rate it an eight out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

The tool is on the cloud. The deployment is straightforward and takes about a day. It does regular maintenance.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The tool's pricing is higher than that of other tools. Other tools offer bundle rates, but Everlaw charges per GB, which is more expensive. It doesn't charge for users; it only charges for hosting.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend Everlaw to others because it's easy for reviewers to use. The analytics are included by default, and the user license makes it easy for reviewers to access. Projects can be done efficiently, and it's easy for managers to track client review status and billing. I rate it a nine out of ten.


showing 1 - 1