|
|
Posts Tagged ‘litigation hold’
Wednesday, August 11th, 2010
The legal hold requirement is vastly misunderstood in my opinion. I have run into many corporate counsels that have the opinion;”I just send and email out to anyone in my company that could have responsive ESI asking them to be sure not to delete any data about the following subjects”. Then, if the delete something they shouldn’t have, it’s their neck, not mine or the company’s.
Tags: archive, Custodial, e-discovery, early case assessment, ECA, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, Email, employee, ESI, iron mountain, legal hold, litigation hold, NearPoint, Spoliation Posted in Bill Tolson, SharePoint, eDiscovery | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, August 5th, 2010
Many (but not all) corporate legal types consider ESI retention management as the legal hold process. Not a bad thought but really falls short of a true corporate definition of the term. To records managers ESI retention management refers to the systematic retention and disposition of the organizations electronic business records; either for the day to day running of the business, regulatory compliance or litigation support. And in this case I believe the records managers are right.
Tags: culling, disposition, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, ESI, evidence, legal, legal hold, litigation, litigation hold, records management, retention management, Spoliation Posted in Bill Tolson, Compliance, eDiscovery, records retention | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, July 15th, 2010
I recently ran across a few articles on U.K. developer CPC Group Ltd and Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment Co, which is the real-estate investment arm of Qatar’s sovereign-wealth fund. The decision was that Qatari Diar wrongfully backed out of a deal to redevelop London’s landmark Chelsea Barracks site after the plan was opposed by Prince Charles, a judge ruled.
Tags: archive, attorney, Collection, Defendant, discovery, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, Email Archiving, judge, litigation hold, responsive, Spoliation Posted in EMEA, Email Archiving, Martin Tuip, Middle East, eDiscovery | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, June 25th, 2010
In the recent case; Jones v. Bremen High School Dist. 228, 2010 WL 2106640 (N.D. Ill. May 25, 2010), one of the discovery points made in the decision was what is the appropriate legal hold process to meet an organization’s legal hold responsibilities.
Tags: Defendant, discovery, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, Email, ESI, iron mountain, judge, legal hold, litigation, litigation hold, plaintiff Posted in Bill Tolson, eDiscovery | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, May 19th, 2010
Iron Mountain Incorporated announced today the release of Stratify Legal Discovery® OnPoint, a new hosted eDiscovery offering that simplifies eDiscovery while reducing costs by delivering free processing and loading of unlimited data for early stage filtering to drive high-productivity review. It enables attorney’s hands-on control of data from the start of a matter coupled with advanced analytics and filtering technologies using linear review methodologies while at the same time establishing a defensible process for selecting responsive data. A one-time fee starting at $500 per gigabyte pertains only to reviewable data.
Tags: electronic discovery, general counsel, iron mountain, litigation, litigation hold, stratify Posted in Martin Tuip, eDiscovery, iron mountain, stratify | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, March 31st, 2010
I have always been told relying on backups for eDiscovery purposes is a costly and time consuming mistake.
Searching through backup tapes or even a disk-based backup for eDiscovery is difficult. Imagine restoring 22 200 GB backup tapes of your employee workstations and
Tags: backup, civil litigation, Classify & Collect, Collection, custodian, e-discovery, ECA, eDiscovery, EDRM, electronic discovery, ESI, iron mountain, legal hold, litigation hold, preservation, privileged, responsive, tape Posted in Bill Tolson, eDiscovery | 1 Comment »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, March 26th, 2010
Tags: discovery, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, ESI, IT, legal, legal hold, litigation hold Posted in Bill Tolson, eDiscovery | 2 Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, February 19th, 2010
In Melendres v. Arpaio, CV-07-2513-PHX (D. Ariz. February 11, 2010) (UNPUBLISHED), U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow granted plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions and ruled that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (“MCSO”) failed to issue a timely litigation hold resulting in the destruction of relevant documents, including e-mails.
In discovery, plaintiffs learned the MCSO shredded relevant documents (i.e., stat sheets) and deleted e-mails. In addition, not a single deponent was aware of their obligation to preserve evidence.
Tags: adverse inference, backup tape, court, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, Email, ESI, litigation hold, plaintiffjudge, responsive ESI Posted in Bill Tolson, Disaster Recovery | 1 Comment »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, January 21st, 2010
In the investor related action, Pension Comm. of the Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of Am. Secs, No. CIV. 05-9016, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1839 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 11, 2010) the defendants, who were connected to a hedge fund that lost money, sought sanctions against the plaintiffs for failing to preserve and produce documents, including ESI, and for submitting false declarations regarding their collection and production efforts. The Judge in this case was the Honorable Shira A. Scheindlin.
Tags: adverse inference, attorney, court, Defendant, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, ESI, evidence, judge, litigation, litigation hold, plaintiff, spolation Posted in Bill Tolson, eDiscovery | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, October 11th, 2009
Corporate records retention policies for many companies are afterthoughts with little understanding of how the company truly uses its documents/records/ESI. In my experience, many companies leave the decision of whether to keep records and for how long to their employees. This strategy is dangerous and costly when litigation is potentially possible. Allowing your employees total control over records and ESI drives the cost of eDiscovery up because you greatly multiple the number of possible storage ares you must check for responsive records. It also increases the risk of spoliation when a litigation hold is required.
Tags: discovery, e-discovery, eDiscovery, electronic discovery, ESI, litigation, litigation hold, policies, records retention, regulatory, Spoliation Posted in Bill Tolson, eDiscovery | No Comments »
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|