January 28, 2011
Citation: Lake v. City of Phoenix (Ariz. Ct. App. Jan. 13, 2009)
e-Lesson Learned: Metadata might not be a public record, so you might not be entitled to it when making a public record request.
Twitter This: Don’t expect to get metadata with your public records request! --> http://ellblog.com/?p=2214
UPDATE: This case has since been appealed, and Arizona now recognizes metadata to be a public record, just as the files it is associated with.
—-
Did Officer Lake deserve his demotion, or did Lieutenant Conrad backdate some notes and fabricate a history of poor job performance?
In 2006, Phoenix Police Officer David Lake submitted a number of public records requests to the City, including a request for copies of Conrad’s notes “documenting supervisory performance” pertaining to Lake. After those notes came in, Lake suspected they were back-dated. Like any vigilant eDiscovery investigator, Officer Lake promptly requested the metadata related to Conrad’s notes, including the “[t]rue creation date, the access date, the access dates for each time [the file] was accessed, including who accessed the file as well as print dates, etc.”
The City of Phoenix denied Lake’s request, arguing in part that the metadata is not a public record. Unfortunately for Officer Lake and government-critics everywhere, the Arizona Court of Appeals agreed with the city.
Continue reading »
No Comments » | 
More...
| 
Permalink
View more articles implicating: Employees
January 24, 2011
Citation: Swofford v. Eslinger, 671 F. Supp. 2d 1274; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111064 (September 28, 2009)
e-Lesson Learned: Willful disregard of obligation to preserve evidence is bad faith that substantially prejudices the plaintiff.
Twitter This: Defendant ignores litigation hold memo; slapped with adverse inference instruction and fees --> http://ellblog.com/?p=2210
Yet again, defendants’ bad faith costs them dearly. In Swofford v. Eslinger, Robert Swofford brought a § 1983 claim and state law claims of battery, negligent training, and supervision against defendants William Morris and Ronald Remus, two Deputies for the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office (“SCSO”), and Donald Eslinger, the Sheriff of Seminole County, State of Florida. Swofford was shot seven times by the Deputies on his own property after being misidentified as a burglar, and spent six weeks in the hospital.
Swofford’s attorney sent two letters to SCSO requesting that all evidence related to the shooting be maintained in its original order. Upon receipt of the letters, SCSO never issued any directives or “litigation hold memos” to prevent the destruction of relevant evidence. The senior members of SCSO who saw the two letters from Swofford’s attorney did not communicate with any other employees of SCSO to maintain evidence relevant to Swofford’s case.
Continue reading »
No Comments » | More...
| Permalink
Tagged as: Good Faith, Legal Hold/Preservation, Sanctions, Spoliation
View more articles implicating: Employees, Government Officials
