Daisy Chaining Assignments Together

Everlaw’s assignment group inclusion criteria allows you to daisy chain assignment groups together. A common use case is to create a first-pass review that automatically feeds into a second-pass review. Let’s walk step-by-step through the creation of a daisy-chained assignment.

First, let’s set up our first-pass review. From the homepage, open the assignment group creation tool by clicking the plus sign icon next to the Assignments column header and selecting “Create New.”

Let’s say that in this case, you want to do a first-pass review of all the documents with a particular author. Using the query builder, you can very easily build a search that will return all of the documents you are looking for, and use this search as your inclusion criteria.


Working your way through the assignment creation wizard, you can name your assignment “First pass of Carolyn Campbell documents.”


Choose the individuals on your first-pass review team.


You can allocate by document or page count, and decide whether to make the group static or dynamic. Remember that if you choose to make the assignment group dynamic, all future documents that are uploaded into the project and have “Carolyn Campbell” as a value in the Author metadata field will automatically be included in the assignment group.


Finally, decide the size of your initial document allocation in the assignment group. If you leave some documents unassigned, you can also choose to let your reviewers self-assign documents from the unassigned pool. This saves reviewers from having to wait for you to manually assign them more documents when they have completed their batch. Leaving the “Batch size” box blank gives the reviewers flexibility to decide how many documents they want to claim in subsequent assignments from this assignment group.


At this point, you can change the review criteria to reflect the conditions that the documents must meet to be considered reviewed. For example, this review criteria holds that documents must have both a rating and code(s) applied, unless they are rated Cold.


Now you can create an assignment group for a second-pass review of these documents. Let’s say that for the second-pass review, you’re only interested in documents that were rated Hot or Warm during the first-pass review. You can create another assignment group from the homepage. To specify the inclusion criteria for your assignment group, construct a search using the query builder that will pull in documents from your first-pass review that received these ratings:


You can repeat the naming and document allocation steps taken when constructing your first-pass assignment group. Since the second-pass group is being set up before any documents in the first-pass group have been rated, there won’t be any documents matching your inclusion criteria. Therefore, you won’t be able to allocate any documents in the final step of the assignment group creation wizard.


Now comes the trickiest part. You want your second-pass assignment group to have the same review criteria as your first-pass assignment group. Even though only hot and warm documents are coming into the second-pass assignment group, a second-pass reviewer might decide to override the first rating decision, and rate a document Cold when they come across it.

However, the review criteria of the second-pass assignment group cannot be exactly the same as the first-pass group (documents having any rating), since this would mean that all of the documents coming into the second-pass group would already be considered reviewed. Because of how assignments allocate documents in Everlaw, you cannot assign already-reviewed documents, nor can reviewers claim already-reviewed documents. As a result, an assignment group that only pulls in documents that it already considers reviewed is functionally useless.

The trick is to add a Viewed By review criterion, such that the documents in your second-pass assignment group are only considered reviewed if they satisfy the criteria of the first-pass group, and have also been viewed by a member of the second-pass group. (For this reason, it’s a good idea to have separate reviewers for the first- and second-pass assignment groups.)



Have more questions? Submit a request


Article is closed for comments.