Litigation retention requires not only that data be retained, but also that it be kept in its current state until the block is lifted. This means, for example, that changes to a database that can modify or delete data are not allowed while the litigation stay is in place. Organizations need to ensure they are fully compliant with data retention requirements – and with increasing amounts of ISEs generated, litigation increasingly requires access to digitally stored evidence. So what can legal teams do to ensure that important data is legally retained and not disposed of? The organization subject to legal retention should document each of these steps. In the event of an audit, documentation is important to demonstrate that the Company has taken appropriate steps to respond to the Notice of Litigation Retention within a reasonable time. You must ensure that your legal retention process and technology are able to record and report the following details for individual cases and custodians: Once you have identified the likely sources of evidence, inform the custodians of their obligation to preserve the evidence. However, since most employees are not legal experts, opinions should be clear, understandable and easy to handle. You must also require your custodian banks to confirm their compliance with the block. When it comes to ensuring that all custodians comply with their custody obligations, consistent oversight is crucial.
In addition to regular reminders and requests for regular confirmation of retention commitments, compliance training, where the negative consequences of non-compliance are clearly defined, can be an effective tool to ensure compliance. If you want to update your legal retention process, you should consider cloud-based software. Cloud software eliminates the burden of required storage space, hardware implementation, and ongoing maintenance. In addition, cloud-based systems typically have stricter security measures and are accessible from offsite locations when needed. To minimize the risk of predatory sanctions, it is recommended that organizations have a company-wide withholding policy that clearly outlines the objectives, steps, and all other aspects of the legal withholding process. For reference, here is an example of a legal retention policy from the American Board of Pediatrics. Without a well-defined process, legal retention periods can become a quagmire of spreadsheets, nervous custodians, and accidentally deleted email responses. Learn how to overcome the most common legal challenges.
Instead, create a standardized and repeatable interview process that considers relevant factors and helps your legal team streamline their investigations. Since no two legal issues are the same, make sure your interview process not only offers flexibility, but also the consistency needed to facilitate editing and action. When responding to a legal prohibition, organizations should follow these practices to minimize risk to the organization: Applying a clear structure to internal processes around legal blocking procedures makes your defense easier and helps you meet all legal requirements. Corporate legal document Legal blocking How to handle a dispute Keep internal eDiscovery Legal blocking Litigation Litigation Blocking Software Litigation Management What is a litigation block? When exactly should you issue a legal suspension? Who should lead them to improve your own legal retention process? Learn 7 easy-to-use strategies for a defensible maintenance process. Depending on the type of data you`re working with, this can be easy or difficult to achieve. For example, emails usually can`t be edited after they`ve been created. They can simply be held in place without risk of modification (although measures must be taken to prevent them from being deleted). In contrast, word processing documents can be easily modified, so keeping them in place while preventing changes may require changing file permissions so that they are read-only for the duration of the legal suspension. Finally, it is also important to document when the lock was released and why (i.e. what was the event that rendered the retention unnecessary?). Certain events may trigger the obligation to retain evidence before litigation is filed. This was the case in Bagley v.
Yale University et al., where the obligation arose when university employees exchanged emails indicating the plaintiff`s threat of legal action. Such cases of looting show how important it is for a legal team to defend its legal blocking process.