e-Discovery Complicates Public Records Requests

15 September 2009 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

One might ask if every public employee must keep every email forever given this report that the Massachusetts Secretary of State ordered the seizure of City of Boston computers searching for deleted emails. This order follows a public records request by the Boston Globe to the Mayor’s office and which yielded only 18 emails during a 6 month period. If the computer forensics specialist cannot find the deleted emails one may only guess what can happen, including possible criminal proceedings.

Saving Every Email Forever

There are products that allow companies to save every email that is delivered to the mail server before the recipient ever gets the emails, which means that as we routinely delete junk, spam, or personal emails they are nonetheless saved forever. Of course how much storage does one need to save every email forever? Probably more than exists. So as a matter of reality businesses must establish Records Retention Policies that are practical and comport with actual practice and allow for the destruction of junk, spam, and personal email.

Google to the Rescue

After Google acquired Postini a couple of years ago it was not clear what was going on until Google announced its entry into e-Discovery with this bargain: “Flat $45 per user per year for up to 10 years of retention. Email archiving has never been simpler or more affordable.” Since ComScore reports that about 65% of all searches are conducted on Google one can be pretty much assured that every Judge in the US uses Google, so litigants probably will be on safe ground to tell Judges that all emails are stored on Google’s systems. Google not only offers emails on their Cloud with specialized search software, but also the peace of mind that Judges probably will think this a great idea to assure that emails are not destroyed.

 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights

Blockchain: A Tool With a Future in Healthcare
18 July 2019
Health Care Law Today
Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ