How to establish a defensible deletion policy
Are you a data hoarder? Does your Outlook inbox remind you of a cluttered attic filled with items of questionable use and unknown origin?
May 04, 2012 at 06:37 AM
11 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Are you a data hoarder? Does your Outlook inbox remind you of a cluttered attic filled with items of questionable use and unknown origin? If you're like most in-house counsel, you keep as many emails and documents as your IT department will allow. It may well be time for some prudent spring cleaning.
Not only can you defensibly delete your legacy data, but you also should do so as a responsible member of your organization. Now is the perfect time to initiate a controlled electronic data purge and to develop a companywide defensible deletion policy.
What is defensible deletion?
As the name suggests, defensible deletions are simply documents and emails that can be freely deleted because they are no longer required for compliance or ongoing business purposes. A defensible deletion policy dictates a standardized process to manage corporate data according to information governance and compliance requirements.
Companies have had strategies to protect and safeguard data for decades, which has led to huge data stockpiles. Employees have been permitted to accumulate massive amounts of data on desktops, including archiving email in local repositories known as PST's. Storage administrators in IT departments frequently add massive silos of disk space to accommodate the saving of more and more files, even storing content from employees that left the company years ago. Archiving and records managers are continually copying important documents and email, too, for long-term retention. Business continuity and backup administrators are replicating all of this content on a weekly basis and archiving it to offsite storage for safekeeping in case of a disaster.
Given these highly redundant procedures, enterprise data is continually copied, sometimes more than once and stashed away throughout an enterprise and in offsite vaults. Thus the overall data store multiplies, growing exponentially forever, if left unchecked by a policy.
This is where a defensive deletion policy can help. To create the policy, inside counsel work with corporate IT and other stakeholders to determine what data needs to be kept for compliance or business reasons, and what can be safely and responsibly deleted.
Implementing a defensible deletion methodology not only manages long term risks and liabilities related to enterprise data assets; it also saves time and expense to support ongoing litigation and e-discovery efforts and reduces data center budget spent on storing and managing data that is no longer useful.
Prioritize according to risk
Corporate data resides on desktops, networks, servers, legacy backup tapes and repositories. Understanding and profiling the magnitude of this data is not an easy task. However, knowledge of where data resides and what it contains will drive efficiency and management of the content. Getting a firm grasp on this is the foundation of your defensible deletion playbook.
A viable way to develop policy is to segment the environments and prioritize the data that represents the most risk and liability as follows:
| Volume of Storage | Data Risk and Liability |
Desktops: | Low | Medium |
Network Servers: | High | Low |
Email Servers: | Low | High |
Legacy Backup Tapes: | High | High |
The highest-risk data environments are typically email servers and legacy tapes. Email is the most common source of evidence produced for litigation. Additionally, email has regulatory and compliance preservation requirements because it is the source of sensitive communication and agreements.
When a company is sued and evidence is collected, email—usually stored on an email server—is usually the first place to look. However copies of email are lurking in many other locations throughout the network. A sensitive email from the CEO, for instance, can reside on the CEO's desktop, a copy on his/her laptop or home PC, a PST file that was archived to a network server, a copy on the email server and, finally, multiple copies clustered away on legacy backup tapes.
Legacy backup tapes contain a snapshot of everything, including email and files, from a particular time period, so they are extremely high risk to keep lying around. Using new technologies enables remediation and indexing of the data on these tapes, so the physical tapes can be eventually destroyed once the responsive content is identified and extracted.
Your policy can initially focus on high risk data and continue down to lower risk items; this makes a monumental task more manageable. A playbook is critical to determining an achievable action plan. Many organizations are overwhelmed when faced with massive volumes of data, including legacy content archived away in old data stores. The playbook breaks down the process and develops an approach that is achievable and measurable.
Managing corporate data, both current and legacy content, is more critical than ever. Defensible deletion of content not required for compliance or operational purposes is justifiably a key focus of chief risk officers and information governance teams worldwide. Many organizations have had legal issues resulting from “hidden” or older data that was discovered during litigation. These documents and email sometimes contains “smoking guns” that prove harmful in the event of current and ongoing litigation.
Don't let this happen to you. Work with stakeholders at your corporation to develop a sound defensible deletion policy which creates boundaries around your data and guides employees appropriately. True, you and your colleagues will have to clean out your virtual attic, but it's certainly better to be proactive than to have a dusty old email or document surface at your organization that causes you an even bigger headache.
Are you a data hoarder? Does your Outlook inbox remind you of a cluttered attic filled with items of questionable use and unknown origin? If you're like most in-house counsel, you keep as many emails and documents as your IT department will allow. It may well be time for some prudent spring cleaning.
Not only can you defensibly delete your legacy data, but you also should do so as a responsible member of your organization. Now is the perfect time to initiate a controlled electronic data purge and to develop a companywide defensible deletion policy.
What is defensible deletion?
As the name suggests, defensible deletions are simply documents and emails that can be freely deleted because they are no longer required for compliance or ongoing business purposes. A defensible deletion policy dictates a standardized process to manage corporate data according to information governance and compliance requirements.
Companies have had strategies to protect and safeguard data for decades, which has led to huge data stockpiles. Employees have been permitted to accumulate massive amounts of data on desktops, including archiving email in local repositories known as PST's. Storage administrators in IT departments frequently add massive silos of disk space to accommodate the saving of more and more files, even storing content from employees that left the company years ago. Archiving and records managers are continually copying important documents and email, too, for long-term retention. Business continuity and backup administrators are replicating all of this content on a weekly basis and archiving it to offsite storage for safekeeping in case of a disaster.
Given these highly redundant procedures, enterprise data is continually copied, sometimes more than once and stashed away throughout an enterprise and in offsite vaults. Thus the overall data store multiplies, growing exponentially forever, if left unchecked by a policy.
This is where a defensive deletion policy can help. To create the policy, inside counsel work with corporate IT and other stakeholders to determine what data needs to be kept for compliance or business reasons, and what can be safely and responsibly deleted.
Implementing a defensible deletion methodology not only manages long term risks and liabilities related to enterprise data assets; it also saves time and expense to support ongoing litigation and e-discovery efforts and reduces data center budget spent on storing and managing data that is no longer useful.
Prioritize according to risk
Corporate data resides on desktops, networks, servers, legacy backup tapes and repositories. Understanding and profiling the magnitude of this data is not an easy task. However, knowledge of where data resides and what it contains will drive efficiency and management of the content. Getting a firm grasp on this is the foundation of your defensible deletion playbook.
A viable way to develop policy is to segment the environments and prioritize the data that represents the most risk and liability as follows:
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 AllBig Tech Is Cozying Up to President Trump. Here's Why Their Lawyers Are Cautiously Optimistic
Starbucks Hands New CLO Hefty Raise, Says He Fosters 'Environment of Courage and Joy'
Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, So Why Were US Numbers Flat?
6 minute readMeta Workers Aren't of One Mind on Company's Retreat From DEI, Fact-Checking
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
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