Reading the innumerable writings these days regarding e-discovery, it is impossible to ignore how many of them involve “information governance.” Interestingly, most of that writing concerns collecting the data via forensic imaging or by putting into place archiving solutions, but fails to discuss how important the manner in which data is generated and organized by the party at issue is to the preservation of that data.
The relatively recent matter of Matthew Enterprise v. Chrysler Group, No. 13-cv-04236-BLF (N.D. CA May 23, 2016), perfectly illustrates what not to do when you need to preserve data for litigation purposes. In this month’s column, I will discuss the plaintiff’s errors in Matthew Enterprise and how the plaintiff could have taken low-tech, as well as high-tech steps, to preserve data.
Background
This content has been archived.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]
