Private Facebook Profiles Are Not Private in Lawsuits
In its recent opinion in Forman v. Henkin, the highest court in New York concluded that information posted on a user's private Facebook profile is discoverable.
September 07, 2018 at 01:36 PM
3 minute read
In its recent opinion in Forman v. Henkin, the highest court in New York concluded that information posted on a user's private Facebook profile is discoverable. The Forman decision follows the 2015 decision of the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal in Nucci v. Target, which was one of the first state appellate courts to have addressed this issue.
In Forman, the plaintiff claimed that she was injured when she fell from a horse and suffered spinal and traumatic brain injuries resulting in in cognitive deficits, memory loss, difficulties with written and oral communication and social isolation. During her deposition, the plaintiff testified that prior to her accident, she led an active lifestyle involving horseback riding, boating, traveling, cooking, attending movies and theater, and that she often posted pictures of her activities on Facebook. She further testified that post-accident, she could no longer engage in those activities and that she had difficulty reading, writing and using a computer.
The defendant-owner of the horse sought to access the plaintiff's entire private Facebook account, arguing that the photographs and postings on the account would yield information material and necessary to defend against the plaintiff's claims. The New York trial court agreed in part and ordered the plaintiff produce all pre-accident photos of herself that she intended to use at trial, all post-accident photos of herself that do not depict nudity or romantic encounters, and an authorization for Facebook records showing every time she posted a message after the accident. The plaintiff appealed to the appellate division which limited the disclosure to only those photographs posted on Facebook that the plaintiff intended to introduce at trial.
On appeal to the highest court in New York, the Court of Appeals reversed and reinstated the trial court's order granting broad discovery of the plaintiff's private Facebook account and stated: “We assume for purposes of resolving the narrow issue before us that some materials on a Facebook account may fairly be characterized as private. But even private materials may be subject to discovery if they are relevant.”
It is important to note that the Forman decision does not represent a departure from traditional discovery rules. As underscored by both the New York Forman decision and the Florida Nucci decision, social media discovery is no different than traditional paper discovery—it is governed by the same rules of civil procedure, which require the party advancing the discovery to demonstrate the relevance of the information sought. In other words, a party's entire private Facebook account does not automatically become discoverable just because that party is involved in litigation. That said, we can all look forward to private social media profiles being sought as a commonplace discovery tool. So, let's be careful out there!
Franklin Zemel is a partner with Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr. He focuses on appellate law, business law, civil rights litigation, securities, antitrust, complex commercial litigation, and labor and employment law.
Ariel R. Deray is an associated with Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr. She focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation.
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
© 2024 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 AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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