The discovery plan looked solid. Custodians were identified early, legal hold notices were issued, and collections were completed without issue. Everything followed a familiar structure — organized, defensible, and on schedule. From the outside, it was the kind of process most teams would feel confident about.
Then, during a routine internal discussion, someone mentioned a name that hadn’t come up before. Not a senior executive. Not someone obvious. Just a mid-level employee who had been involved at a key moment in the timeline. At first, it didn’t seem important. But as the conversation continued, it became clear that this person had been part of decisions that shaped the case.
The People You Miss Are Rarely the Obvious Ones
In discovery, custodians are often selected based on structure — titles, departments, reporting lines. It’s a logical approach, and in many cases, it works. But real decision-making doesn’t always follow an org chart. Some of the most relevant information comes from individuals who sit just outside the expected group.
These are the people who were copied on a message, looped into a conversation, or brought in at a critical moment to weigh in. They may not appear central at first glance, but they often hold context that others don’t. When they are missed, the data set can still look complete, but it may not fully reflect how decisions were actually made.
What makes this challenging is that these gaps are rarely obvious at the beginning. Everything appears aligned — until a document references a conversation, a name appears unexpectedly, or a timeline doesn’t quite connect.
Custodian Selection Is a Judgment Call, Not a Checklist
One of the most common misconceptions in discovery is that custodian identification is a straightforward step. In reality, it’s one of the most important judgment calls in the entire process. It requires understanding not just who holds information, but how that information moves across a team.
Strong discovery planning looks beyond titles and asks deeper questions. Who was involved in key decisions? Who communicated across departments? Who may have context that others don’t? These questions often reveal individuals who wouldn’t have been included in a standard list.
When custodians are identified thoughtfully, discovery becomes more complete and easier to defend. When they are selected too narrowly, gaps may only appear later — often when it’s harder to adjust without impacting timelines, cost, or credibility.
Closing
Discovery rarely breaks because of something obvious. More often, it’s shaped by what wasn’t considered early enough. The custodian no one thought to include is not a mistake — it’s a reminder of how complex real-world communication can be.
At Sovereign Discovery, discovery planning is approached with that complexity in mind. The focus is not only on identifying the expected sources of information, but on understanding how decisions actually happen within an organization.
Because in discovery, completeness isn’t just about data. It’s about perspective.