1 Record Management, Electronic Discovery, and the Changing Legal Landscape Dino Tsibouris (614) 228-9707

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Williams v. Sprint/United Management Co.
Advertisements

1 Amendments to the Federal Rules Electronic Discovery Dino Tsibouris (614)
Saving Your Documents Can Save You Anne D. Harman, Esq. Bethany B. Swaton, Esq. Dinsmore & Shohl LLP 2100 Market Street, Wheeling (304)
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, 2004 District Justice Scheindlin Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC Zubulake V.
Public Records Office Indiana Access to Public Records Act and Responding to Subpoenas Employee Training.
Review Questions Business 205
Responding to Subpoenas Springfield Metropolitan Bar Association Doug Healy March 25, 2013.
E-Discovery New Rules of Civil Procedure Presented by Lucy Isaki January 23, 2007.
INFORMATION WITHOUT BORDERS CONFERENCE February 7, 2013 e-DISCOVERY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) Training.
Ethical Issues in Data Security Breach Cases Presented by Robert J. Scott Scott & Scott, LLP
Ethical Issues in the Electronic Age Ethical Issues in the Electronic Age Frost Brown Todd LLC Seminar May 24, 2007 Frost Brown.
1 Records Management and Electronic Discovery Ken Sperl (614) Martin.
E-Discovery LIMITS ON E-DISCOVERY. No New Preservation Rule When does duty to preserve attach? Reasonably anticipated litigation. Audio sanctions.
W W W. D I N S L A W. C O M E-Discovery and Document Retention Patrick W. Michael, Esq. Dinsmore & Shohl LLP 101 South Fifth Street Louisville, KY
Developing a Records & Information Retention & Disposition Program:
1 E-Discovery Changes to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Concerning Discovery of Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Effective Date: 12/01/2006 October,
Electronic Record Retention and eDiscovery Peter Pepiton eDiscovery Product Manager CA Information Governance.
Grant S. Cowan Information Management & eDiscovery Practice Group.
Investigating & Preserving Evidence in Data Security Incidents Robert J. Scott Scott & Scott, LLP
©2011 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley E-DISCOVERY Hélène Kazanjian Anne Sterman Trial Division.
Do you Know Where your Data is? Gregory P. Silberman, CISSP Technology Intellectual Property & Outsourcing Group Kaye Scholer LLP May 10, 2005.
Privacy, Confidentiality and Duty to Warn in School Guidance Services March 2006 Disclaimer - While the information in these slides are designed to reflect.
230 F.R.D. 640 (D. Kan. 2005).  Shirley Williams is a former employee of Sprint/United Management Co.  Her employment was terminated during a Reduction-in-
Perspectives on Discovery from an Attorney / Records Manager 3/15/2007 ©The Cadence Group, Inc Confidential & Proprietary Information is our Forté.
The Sedona Principles 1-7
Attorney-Client Privilege and Privacy Considerations Between US Corporations & Foreign Affiliates General Counsel Conference, Washington, D.C. October.
[Hayes, Dassen, Schilder and Wallage, Principles of Auditing An Introduction to ISAs, edition 2.1] © Pearson Education Limited 2007 Slide 11A.1 Audit Documentation.
E-Discovery in Health Care Litigation By Tracy Vigness Kolb.
FRCP 26(f) Sedona Principle 3 & Commentaries Ryann M. Buckman Electronic Discovery September 21, 2009 Details of FRCP 26(f) Details of Sedona Principle.
EDiscovery, Records Management and Records Retention.
E-Discovery: Understanding the 2006 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure amendments, continuing complaints, and speculation about more rule changes to come.
2009 CHANGES IN CALIFORNIA DISCOVERY RULES The California Electronic Discovery Act Batya Swenson E-discovery Task Force
Dangerous Documents. Legal Compliances State and federal laws Contractual obligations Subject to an affirmative legal duty to establish and maintain certain.
DOE V. NORWALK COMMUNITY COLLEGE, 248 F.R.D. 372 (D. CONN. 2007) Decided July 16, 2002.
Advanced Civil Litigation Class 11Slide 1 Production of Documents Scope Scope Includes documents of all types, including pictures, graphs, drawings, videos.
Meet and Confer Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “parties must confer as soon as practicable - and in any event at least.
Lori A. Tetreault, Esq. May 17, We’re Gonna talk About:  Pre-trial Discovery  The new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  “Electronically Stored.
Against: The Liberal Definition and use of Litigation Holds Team 9.
Public Review Committee Linda Sullivan-Colglazier Assistant Attorney General July 28, 2011.
P RINCIPLES 1-7 FOR E LECTRONIC D OCUMENT P RODUCTION Maryanne Post.
1 eDiscovery & eRetention: Facing the Challenge Presented by: Thomas Greene Special Assistant Attorney General September 22, 2008.
2006 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Will Change How You Address Electronically Stored Information Bay Area Intellectual Property Inn.
The Challenge of Rule 26(f) Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer July 15, 2011.
Rambus v. Infineon Technologies AG 22 F.R.D. 280 (E.D. Va. 2004)
Cache La Poudre Feeds, LLC v. Land O’Lakes, Inc. 224 F.R.D. 614 (D. Colo. 2007) By: Sara Alsaleh Case starts on page 136 of the book!
Digital Government Summit
Records Management for Paper and ESI Document Retention Policies addressing creation, management and disposition Minimize the risk and exposure Information.
The Sedona Principles November 16, Background- What is The Sedona Conference The Sedona Conference is an educational institute, established in 1997,
Legal Holds Department of State Division of Records Management Kevin Callaghan, Director.
E-Discovery And why it matters to a SSA. What is E-Discovery? E-Discovery is the process during litigation of discovering information relevant to litigation.
Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act Heather Willis Neal Indiana Public Access Counselor Presented to Indiana State Department of Health August 21, 2008.
U.S. District Court Southern District of New York 229 F.R.D. 422 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)
Record Retention to Manage Risk F. Jay Meyer Vice President & Senior Attorney TD Banknorth, N.A. Portland, Maine.
1 PRESERVATION: E-Discovery Marketfare Annunciation, LLC, et al. v. United Fire &Casualty Insurance Co.
RULES. After five years of discussion and public comment the proposed amendments took effect on December 1, 2006…specifically changing language in six.
EDiscovery Also known as “ESI” Discovery of “Electronically Stored Information” Same discovery, new form of storage.
Sharing Information (FERPA) FY07 REMS Initial Grantee Meeting December 5, 2007, San Diego, CA U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug-Free.
Residential Funding Corp. v. DeGeorge Financial Corp., 306 F.3d 99 (2d. Cir. 2002).
Electronic Discovery Guidelines FRCP 26(f) mandates that parties “meaningfully meet and confer” to consider the nature of their respective claims and defenses.
RECORDS MANAGEMENT TRAINING City of Oregon City. INTRODUCTION TO RECORDS MANAGEMENT
RECORDS MANAGEMENT TRAINING City of Oregon City. INTRODUCTION TO RECORDS MANAGEMENT.
E-Discovery Copyright 2008 Thomas F. Goldman. WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO US NOW? OH NO, NOT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!! Overview.
Records Management Reality
Indiana Access to Public Records Act (APRA) Training
Leveraging the Data Map – A Case Study November 15, 2016
Information Technology & The Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Sonya Naar - DLA Piper US LLP Doug Herman - UHY Advisors FLVS, Inc.
Civil Litigation: Before The Trial
Litigation Holds: Don’t Live in Fear of Spoliation
Records Retention and Its Effects on Discovery
Presentation transcript:

1 Record Management, Electronic Discovery, and the Changing Legal Landscape Dino Tsibouris (614)

2 More Trouble for Morgan Stanley ‘destroyed’ in 9/11 attack is found $1.5 billion judgment for failing to produce thousands of backup tapes of digital documents Paid the SEC $15 million to settle allegations of e- mail mishandling pursuant to SEC investigations NASD accusing Morgan Stanley of failing to provide millions of messages to investigators and plaintiffs and falsely claiming the documents had been lost in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks

3 Samsung destroyed s in patent case Mosaid Technologies alleged Samsung infringed patents for DRAM chips Court cited Samsung’s “breathtaking and absolute spoliation” and “extremely reckless behavior” Source: New Jersey Law Journal 09/04 Destruction of s $566,838 Mistake

4 Sources of Electronic Data 90% of data is created electronically 30% is never printed Sources: Databases - Purchasing, Payables, Receivables, , ERP Hard Drives, Network Backup Tapes File Slack, Deleted & Encrypted Files Meta Data & System Logs

5 Is this your “document retention” system?

6 THE IMPORTANT SLIDE Having a Document Retention Policy and Process is essential A “Cut & Paste” Policy is risky Having a Policy / Process that you do not actually implement & enforce is dangerous

7 Best Practices Destruction of records under a RIM plan estimated to reduce discovery costs by 25 – 30% Categorize documents as “business” and “non-business” communications Establish the term for document and data retention Establish uniform indexing procedures

8 Records: Asset or Liability?

9 Business Drivers

10 Sarbanes-Oxley SEC Regulation S-X Rule 2-06 Audit record retention Electronic records created, sent or received in connection with the audit or review containing conclusions, opinions, analyses or financial data related to the audit or review Retention period of seven years

11 HIPAA All paper and electronic records must be part of a comprehensive records management program 6 year retention period may apply

12 ESIGN LAWS If a law requires record retention, may comply by retaining the records electronically The contract or record must be accurately reflected, remain accessible to all parties entitled to have access and be in a form that is capable of being reproduced for future reference

13 Records Management Maintain up-to date records & information management policies, procedures and schedules Audit your procedures Modify policy & procedures Document the process

14 Records Management Sedona Guidelines SOX Industry Best Practices Emphasis is on your Processes and Procedures

15 Records Management Maintain and track policies, procedures & schedules for litigation defense Document past RM compliance Consistently follow good faith process Include documentation of inactive record keeping systems

16 Records Management Maintain and use an in-house glossary of records management terminology Business units should use common terms Technology terms must be part of the glossary

17 Records Management Know where each record series is stored Know what is the general content of each series Available formats or media Identify personnel or Experts who can assist with any large electronic systems

18 Records Management Be prepared to assist Legal in identifying and preserving relevant records or associates within those business units System to track all legal holds Education/training/tools to preserve records

19 Records Management Need to create tools to automatically suspend all automatic destruction processes legal hold records Need to be able to assist legal counsel in identifying and protecting attorney- client information

20 Records Management Include a “routine good faith operation” for destroying records and information Different processes for different types of record systems Document the destruction processes

21 Records Management Automate systems where appropriate Will prevent Rule 37 Sanctions “Normal” changes will not protect willful destruction or unchecked overwriting

22

23 Effective December 1, 2006 Pretrial planning required “Electronically Stored Information” Format selection The Times They Are A’Changin

24 Litigation “holds” Safe Harbor Failure to comply results in sanctions State courts will follow The Times They Are A’Changin

25 IT Terminology now part of discovery process Where is it stored? How is it transmitted? What format is used? IT IS A RECORDS MANAGEMENT ISSUE

26 Rule 34 Electronically Stored Information Any party may serve on... [an]other party a request (1) to produce... inspect, copy, test, or sample any designated documents or electronically stored information — including writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, sound recordings, images, and other data or data compilations stored in any medium from which information can be obtained — translated, if necessary... into reasonably usable form...

27 Rule 34 Electronically Stored Information Amended Rule 34(a) “Documents” includes ESI unless clearly distinguished from “documents" Requesting party may specify form of production Network access

28 Rule 34 Electronically Stored Information Amended Rule 34(b) Native File Production provision Requesting party may specify the form of ESI production Form more important for ESI Preserve searchability

29 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Except [when] exempted... parties must,... confer to... make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), to discuss any issues relating to preserving discoverable information, and to develop a proposed discovery plan that indicates the parties’ views and proposals concerning:... (3) any issues relating to disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced;

30 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Amended Rule 26(f) Early attention to discovery of ESI Describe ESI to be sought Preservation of relevant data Form of ESI disclosure Privilege or protection

31 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Cost shifting Must only preserve relevant data No duty to preserve all paper, s, backup tapes

32 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Collect electronic communication, records management, retention and legal holds policies Understand the importance of ESI in the case (or lack of it) Prepare to explain to the court your policy: how it is used and enforced - and gaps

33 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Prepare to describe what is a “record” in your organization (and why other data is not) Know where relevant information may be kept Know IT staff who can locate where relevant information is kept Can you help determine what is reasonably accessible and what is not?

34 Rule 26 Initial Disclosures Amended Rule 26(a)(1)(B) Each party must disclose before discovery begins a copy or description (by category and location) of all documents, ESI, and things in the other party's possession, custody or control that it may use to support its claims or defenses.

35 Rule 26 Production Issues and Accessibility Amended Rule 26(b)(2)(B) No need to provide ESI if there is an undue burden or cost Party seeking discovery may move to compel Party claiming undue burden or cost has burden of proof

36 Rule 26 Production Issues and Accessibility Reasonably accessible ESI that is relevant must be produced Do not need to produce ESI from sources that are inaccessible Rule does NOT address duty to preserve relevant information on those sources during litigation

37 Rule 26 Production Issues and Accessibility RM application: Help your attorney locate and track confidential or privileged records Be a primary contact to help manage production RM = rules, IT = tools Create procedures in advance, where practical – and update them

38 Rule 26 Burden of Proof Explanations such as "inactive" or "backup" unlikely to suffice Court can compel party to produce even if they meet burden of proof when there is good cause Creates a “balancing test”

39 Rule 26 Privileged and Trial-Preparation Info ESI includes metadata Shows the history and context of the information Links to other information May reveal privileged or confidential information

40 Rule 45 Subpoena Practice Amended Rule 45(a)(1) - subpoena may specify form or forms to produce ESI Amended Rule 45(d)(1)(B) - ESI default form is "a form or forms in which the person ordinarily maintains it or in a form or forms that are reasonably usable"

41 Rule 45 Subpoena Practice

42 Rule 45 Subpoena Practice Amended Rule 45(d)(1)(C) - the same ESI need only be produced in one form Amended Rule 45(d)(1)(D) - ESI from sources identified as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost need not be produced

43 Rule 37 Safe Harbor Absent exceptional circumstances, a court may not impose sanctions under these rules on a party for failing to provide electronically stored information lost as a result of the routine, good- faith operation of an electronic information system.

44 Rule 37 Safe Harbor Added Rule 37(f) Term "routine operation" refers to the way systems are "generally designed, programmed, and implemented to meet... technical and business needs" Must exercise “good faith”

45 Rule 37 Protection is Narrow Procedures must be established, documented and followed Incentive for destruction? Coordinate with other regulations Safe harbor only applies to sanctions "under these rules"

46 Rule 26 Conference to Plan Discovery Develop defensible practices Consistent application of RM procedures If no overall plan, look for some patterns of consistency Be able to educate and warn your attorney about “issues”

47 Questions & Answers