* Court ruling could have significant impact on e-discovery cases and the admissibility of e-mail
On May 4, Judge Paul W. Grimm issued a ruling in the case of Lorraine v. Markel that could have a significant impact on e-discovery cases and the admissibility of e-mail. Judge Grimm’s ruling read, in part:
“In this case the failure of counsel collectively to establish the authenticity of their exhibits, resolve potential hearsay issues, comply with the original writing rule, and demonstrate the absence of unfair prejudice rendered their exhibits inadmissible, resulting in the dismissal, without prejudice, of their cross motions for summary judgment. The discussion above highlights the fact that there are five distinct but interrelated evidentiary issues that govern whether electronic evidence will be admitted into evidence at trial or accepted as an exhibit in summary judgment practice. Although each of these rules may not apply to every exhibit offered…each still must be considered in evaluating how to secure the admissibility of electronic evidence to support claims and defenses. Because it can be expected that electronic evidence will constitute much, if not most, of the evidence used in future motions practice or at trial, counsel should know how to get it right on the first try.”
The last sentence above is really the crux of the matter. As Wireless Time has discussed on their Web site, the ruling will have a significant impact on the admissibility of evidence that is presented not only during court cases, but also presented to the U.S. government for filings ranging from Department of Energy to Sarbanes-Oxley findings.
The bottom line is that electronic evidence – which will constitute a larger share of total evidence over time – must meet rigorous standards for relevance and authenticity. Even time stamping of data will become more important for data that is presented to the courts and regulators in support of motions, etc. This underscores the need to preserve electronic data in archiving systems that can prove its chain of custody, its originality and the fact that is has not been altered over time.
