(no title)
ararar
|
1 year ago
Most Fortune 500 companies have (I am extrapolating wildly here since I haven't worked at all of them) email retention policies that specify that emails will not be kept past a certain time after reception. So when an opposing lawyer requires the emails that were sent a year ago ... well, those were deleted as per policy. It's weird that if the companies had a policy to immediately delete them it would be "bad" but if they delete them after 30 days due to "storage" reasons and a clear, global, openly stated policy, it's OK. It doesn't stop someone from stuffing old emails in a folder.
dragonwriter|1 year ago
Those policies are suspended for materials subject to a litigation hold, whether triggered by actual or reasonably foreseen litigation or an active investigation for which they have been notified to preserve evidence (which is mostly a formalized case of reasonably foreseen litigation) and if they aren’t, the company can be sanctioned for destroying evidence (and adverse inferences can be drawn from the destruction of evidence in the litigation, separate from the penalties for destroying evidence.)
> It’s weird that if the companies had a policy to immediately delete them it would be “bad” but if they delete them after 30 days due to “storage” reasons and a clear, global, openly stated policy, it’s OK.
Actually, deleting either way would be sanctionable where a retention requirement of the type at issue applies.
j33zusjuice|1 year ago
galleywest200|1 year ago
AgentOrange1234|1 year ago