Tuesday, December 27, 2016

6 Social Media Tips for Litigators to Remember

, Legaltech News

Social media has created a wealth of valuable information—and a host of new considerations—for litigators.


Social media has given people the opportunity to share all kinds of information with the public, and many use it to detail every aspect of their daily lives. As a result, litigators have access to a treasure trove of information that can be used when preparing or litigating a case. 


Although litigators commonly deal with emails and text messages, they may be less familiar with how to handle access to, or content derived from, social media sites. Developing an understanding of how to use this increasingly important tool in an attorney’s arsenal is crucial. 

Below are some tips for litigators to remember when dealing with social media content.

1. Social media posts must be preserved. As with any other type of evidence, when litigation is anticipated or ongoing, there is a duty to preserve social media content. Destroying or altering information on a social media account can lead to claims of spoliation and hefty sanctions.

For example, in Congregation Rabbinical College of Tartikov, Inc. v. Village of Pomona, the Southern District of New York imposed sanctions, which included an adverse inference instruction at trial and attorneys’ fees and costs, against defendants who deleted Facebook posts and related text messages that they should have preserved during ongoing litigation. In another case stemming from the death of a plaintiff’s wife (Allied Concrete Co. v. Lester), a Virginia trial court sanctioned both the plaintiff and his attorney after the plaintiff, in response to his attorney’s advice to sanitize his Facebook page, deleted his Facebook page and photographs that may have undermined his claim for damages for his wife’s death, including one with the plaintiff holding a beer while wearing a t-shirt that read “I <3 hot moms.” In addition to issuing an adverse inference instruction, the trial court ordered fines of $542,000 for the attorney and $180,000 for the plaintiff.

2. Ethical rules apply to social media communication. Although social media may seem like a free-for-all, ethical rules still apply to attorneys searching for social media information. Ethical rules often do allow attorneys to use social media platforms to contact an unrepresented witness or party, but only if the attorney does not engage in deceptive behavior in the process. For example, an attorney generally cannot create a Facebook profile with a pseudonym or inaccurate information for the purpose of “friending” an unrepresented witness or party to gain access to their non-public posts, photographs, and the like.

3. Know the difference between public and non-public information. When investigating a case, public information on social media—which can be viewed by anyone without the permission of the account holder—is fair game. Generally, however, an attorney may not attempt to access non-public information for use in litigation by “friending” a represented person or “following” their social media account, as that violates the prohibition against communicating with represented parties.

With respect to privacy settings, attorneys may advise their clients to change them on their personal social media accounts to make public information non-public, as long as evidence is not deleted or destroyed (and attorneys should consider backing up clients’ social media information to protect against spoliation claims when privacy settings are changed). However, even after information has been made non-public, parties must comply with non-objectionable discovery requests and supply relevant non-public social media content where requested.

4. Some jurisdictions allow service of process through social media. Courts have increasingly allowed service of process on a difficult-to-find defendant through social media where the plaintiff can demonstrate the authenticity of associated email accounts and that the defendant recently accessed the social media account. For example, in Ferrarese v. Shaw, a recent case involving an international custody dispute, the court allowed the petitioner to attempt service through the defendant’s Facebook and Instagram accounts after diligent but unsuccessful attempts to locate the defendant, who also appeared to frequently change names.

5. Social media is not a license to fish. Parties must carefully craft discovery requests for social media content, as courts do not like fishing expeditions, even in the context of social media. Attorneys should be prepared to demonstrate that the content they want is relevant and proportional to the needs of the case.

6. Don’t forget the jury. Social media can supply a wealth of information about potential jurors. For example, social media content can reveal potential jurors’ educational and professional backgrounds, the types of organizations they follow, and their political affiliations. However, attorneys must tread lightly when looking for this information. Although public information is typically fair game when researching potential jurors, attorneys are almost always prohibited from following or connecting with potential jurors through social media.

Attorneys should also keep in mind that once trial begins, a juror who improperly uses social media can cause disastrous consequences. Juror social media use increasingly has become a basis for post-trial motions and appeals. To prevent these types of issues, attorneys should regularly check public social media content (unless prohibited by the court) and report any misconduct to the court, such as posts that suggest bias or consideration of information not presented during a case. Attorneys should also consider asking the court to instruct the jury to avoid social media both before and during the trial and the consequences for not doing so. Asking the court to require jurors to take an oath to refrain from social media use during trial may be another possibility.

Lauren M. Sobel joined Practical Law from Shutts & Bowen, where she was a partner in the firm's business litigation department.



No comments:

Post a Comment