Our regimen for preservation of electronically stored information (ESI) at the federal level — and in particular the “reasonable anticipation of litigation” test for when parties must begin affirmative preservation efforts — is the creation of decisions in “bad facts” cases. As a result, and despite its widespread reach, our current preservation protocol is deeply flawed in critical ways.
Inconsistent: Preservation law is not consistent across jurisdictions. In some circuits, negligence suffices to support sanctions, in others it does not. Some decisions require written litigation hold notices while others have ruled that oral notices can be sufficient.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
