IGc4s

This week, we covered the legal considerations of Information Governance. What did you learn this week?

50 words.

Discussion-1 comment 100 words and a reference

E-Discovery can be described as the discovery done through electronic medium or format in case of legal proceedings like investigations, litigations etc. Various cases are been solved with the help of electronic medium as the discovery can be easier using electronic medium. One such case is: CASE NO. C16-1791-JCC (W.D. Wash. Apr. 23, 2019) here in this case the discovery was done with the help of electronic medium ("Neely v. Boeing Co, CASE NO. C16-1791-JCC | Casetext", 2019). The Plaintiff charged a case against W. Percy Badham that a request was sent to the Badham firm to return the Plantiff’s documents which were once submitted for some purpose. The firm was asked to mail the documents on a given address through the U.S. Postal Delivery services and according to the firm it mailed the documents back to the owner but still the case was on the firm that the documents and personal information were been misused of the Plaintiff this means that another copy of the documents were been made. As per the firm they had send the documents and not copied any of it. Then the investigation was made and through it came to light that the firm saved the documents on the Microsoft personal storage outlook file. The file was decrypted the documents and saved in the internal data.  This case came into light with the help of the electronic medium of Microsoft personal storage outlook file from where the mails were missing. According to Federal Law the Plaintiff was to be given judgment because the personal information was being used without permission.

 

 

 

 

 

References

Neely v. Boeing Co, CASE NO. C16-1791-JCC | Casetext. (2019). Retrieved 17 September 2019, from https://casetext.com/case/neely-v-boeing-co-3

 

Discussion-2 comment 100 words and a reference

The case that I am going to explain is between Paisley Park Enterprises, Inc. v. Boxill. The two were business partners who used to work together. Paisley Park Enterprises Inc. has previously signed a secret contract with Boxill which stated that he, in no means whatsoever was allowed to use the name or brand of the plaintiff for advertising or spreading newly formed albums without his permission. The plaintiff, in this case, Paisley Park Enterprises Inc., found out that Boxill had violated their contract, and went ahead to go against the confidentiality agreement. The defendant went ahead to defend himself by saying that the two were partners and even provided a letter which proved that prince recording was a joint work between both of them together.

The court believed that for the tortious claim to have been adequate, a particular order was supposed to be followed and was not. The court found out that the defendant had failed to state a claim because they did not specify and business partner whom they expected a future economic advantage. The court then decided to use the e-discovery system, and they checked at the company's email, phone calls, and opinion letters which were all of no uses. The e-discovery was a brilliant technique to apply, and so the court found out about the truth and dismissed the case. The case saw to it that jurisdiction was a matter even when the e-discovery was still something so useful in the determination of claims. I believe this case had less impact on the e-Discovery subject, unlike the other instances of its kind (Loeb & Loeb LLP., 2019).

 

References:

Loeb & Loeb LLP. (2019, February 22). Paisley Park Enterprises, Inc. v. Boxill. Retrieved from  https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9c18d178-510f-4b22-94be-f37c32454b79