nanog mailing list archives

Fw: website case


From: "todd glassey" <todd.glassey () worldnet att net>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 14:11:25 -0800


FYI -
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rae Cogar" <rcogar () localnet com>
To: <CLCC-MEMS () MAIL ABANET ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 7:26 AM
Subject: website case


Here is a recently reported case from California that found a company
guilty of spoliation of evidence by changing information on their
website during litigation.   One point made by the court in this case is
there were no policies or procedures for the updating or deleting of
material from the website.  You can find this opinion at:



http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/tentrule.nsf/4f9d4c4a03b0cf70882567980073b
2e4/cf68f686007991fa88256af1006a9e16?OpenDocument

(you will need to cut and paste url)

Spoliation Sanctions for Deletion of Web Page
The defendant corporation moved to dismiss for lack of personal
jurisdiction, denying minimum contacts with the state of California.
The plaintiff offered as evidence a page from the defendant's web site
that listed a California office address.  While the motion was pending,
the California address disappeared from the defendant's web site.
Though one employee of the defendant testified that he had deleted the
page in routine maintenance, there was no corporate maintenance policy
that would explain the deletion.  The court granted the plaintiff's
motion to enjoin further spoliation and ordered that the defendant pay
plaintiff's attorney's fees as a sanction. Pennar Software Corp. v.
Fortune 500 Sys., 51 Fed. R. Serv. 279 (N.D. Cal. 2001).


Another case for good records management!

Rae Cogar, Esq.
RCS Consulting
Hamburg, NY  716-646-6192
rcogar () localnet com


Current thread: