Why Social Media Isn't Different From Other Types of Discoverable Content
The Sedona Conference recently updated its social media primer to include new guidance and observations about the challenges of social media discovery.
February 21, 2019 at 12:42 PM
4 minute read
Social media is becoming more popular and in turn is being introduced more often in discovery. In response, the Sedona Conference updated its guide on social media, emphasizing relevance and proportionality when evaluating what communications to consider in discovery.
Counsel often battle over relevance, proportionality and burden, the Sedona Conference noted in the recently updated “The Sedona Conference Primer on Social Media.”
When assessing social media evidence, the guidance suggested evaluating which social media platform is likely to contain relevant information, what information is likely to be relevant and who possesses the social media data. What's more, deciding the date range of discoverable content and the reasonable preservation and production formats are key factors to consider when looking to avoid headaches during the discovery process.
Generally, social media is treated no differently procedurally from other requests for production, the guidance noted.
“The scope of discovery for social media content is no different from other categories of information. The threshold question remains whether social media evidence is 'relevant to any party's claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case,'” the guidance said.
However, where social media can be unique is around questions of accessibility. If a message on social media is delivered and read, the courts are split if it's privy to the Stored Communications Act or not. Counsel can obtain communications protected by the SCA through a subpoena or obtain them directly from the user or subscriber.
But like any other discoverable content, it's important to know where and how social media is used. Lauren Schwartzreich, a Littler Mendelson shareholder and one of several drafters of the updated Sedona Conference social media guidance, said lawyers must understand how their client communicates and stores information.
“As lawyers we are doing a better job by maintaining some awareness about what the different social media platforms are and how they are being used and how that data is being stored and how it's accessible,” Schwartzreich said. “We face a bit of a risk if we don't take reasonable steps to invest and preserve information, there may be consequences down the line for our clients.”
The need to stay abreast of how clients are communicating and where that data is stored is essential for in-house as well.
“I think a lot of us are struggling with the availability of all these tools as a way to communicate,” said Amy Sellars, associate GC and discovery operations group lead for Walmart and a drafter of Sedona Conference's recent social media publication. “A lot of people are not thoughtful or mindful that business communications shouldn't live in a social media platform but the truth is that's where we are finding them now.”
“We tend to rely on our old paradigms when it comes to preservation and collection,” but such preoccupation will lead to missing big sources of information, she added.
The lines of communication should also be open between legal and other departments to better understand where discoverable data resides, Sellars advised. For example, if a tool is created to better customer service, legal should be involved to review what and how data is preserved through that tool.
Lawyers should also become more aware of emerging social media to serve as better business partners, she added.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250