Litigation Holds and E-Discovery Demands - Law technology News
Everyone deletes email from time to time. No harm, no foul, right? Not so if you're a party to litigation. Recent decisions may have lawyers scrambling to find e-discovery consultants to advise clients on the preservation of evidence. One such decision, Einstein v. 357 LLC, held that a party's deletion of email after litigation has commenced is tantamount to spoliation of evidence and necessarily entitles the opposing party to an adverse inference.
Mark A. Berman, secretary of the e-discovery committee of the Commercial Litigation Section of the New York State Bar Association, comments in a recent New York Law Journal article, on another technology area that may not be ripe for e-discovery. Courts presiding over cases involving car accidents where one of the parties was alleged to be using a cell phone have compelled wireless phone companies to provide call detail records for the time period that the accident occurred despite the lack of apparent evidence that the driver had been using the phone. According to the article "The case law, however, is unclear whether there needs to be evidence and, if so, the type and weight of same, to justify compelling the production of such records from a non-party provider of such communication services."
With one area of e-discovery case law only somewhat defined, and others still emerging, it's easy to speculate that e-discovery consultants have a bright future in front of them. Commenters estimate that litigants will be spending $4.6 billion annually on e-discovery by the end of 2010.
clip in hair extensions