In today’s global economy, SharePoint software helps businesses with content management, collaboration and sharing for intranet and Internet websites. However, with today’s increased record keeping responsibilities and e-Discovery demands, there are increasing legal discovery issues with the content generated by businesses in Sharepoint. Attorneys need to be aware of these legal issues and counsel their business clients accordingly.
In the wake of Enron and the passage of Dodd-Frank and the Sarbanes Oxley Act, there are literally thousands of disparate retention requirements mandated by state and federal law. With the advent of e-Discovery and legal holds, its now easier for companies to be liable for spoliation of evidence …. because the duty to preserve evidence now begins before a lawsuit is even initiated!! Spoliation of evidence can be deadly for your client’s case and pocketbook. For example, in January 2011 Delaware’s Chancery Court ordered the defendants in the case of Victor Stanley, Inc. vs. Creative Pipe, Inc. to pay over $1 million in damages for the willful loss and destruction of ESI (electronically stored information).
If you need help counseling your business clients on the legal issues associated with records retention and SharePoint, Attorney Credits has recently added an excellent CLE course entitled SharePoint: Legal Discovery & Data Storage Issues. In this course, John Isaza discusses the legal discovery issues associated with SharePoint, including the scope of information to manage, the legal analysis impacting SharePoint use and best practices for handling the legal issues associated with SharePoint.
- Collaboration portals & social networking sites within SharePoint
- Global & domestic regulations
- Preservation case law 
- Legal holds
- International privacy regulations
- Symantec & Clearwell surveys
- SharePoint RIM management
- Communicating the rules
John Isaza is one of the country’s leading experts on electronic discovery, the revised Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and other RIM issues. Mr. Isaza has conducted regulatory research and worked in developing records retention programs for numerous Fortune 200 companies. Mr. Isaza also has over a decade of experience as a trial lawyer specializing in business, environmental contamination, products liability and construction defects. Mr. Isaza attended Boston College Law School, where he served as the Editor of the International Law Review. He is an active speaker in the ARMA and AIIM circuits and he has authored several articles on electronic discovery and information management. He has also presented 7 Steps for Legal Holds: Avoiding Malpractice and Jail! for our Attorney Credits CLE website.
This CLE course is currently accredited in the following states:
- Alaska (AK)
- Arizona (AZ)
- California (CA)
- Connecticut (CT)
- District of Columbia (DC)
- Georgia (GA)
- Illinois (IL)
- Maryland (MD)
- Massachusetts (MA)
- Michigan (MI)
- New Jersey (NJ)
- New York (NY)
- South Dakota (SD)
 And globally each country possesses its own International privacy requirements such as the United Kingdom’s Data Protection Act.
 The duty to preserve material evidence arises not only during the litigation but also extends to that period before the litigation when a party reasonably should know that the evidence may be relevant to anticipated litigation. See: Toth v. Parish (W.D. La. Mar. 2, 2009) 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16116.
 Case law discussed includes Spanish Peaks Lodge v. Keybank 2012 WL 895465 (W.D. Penn 2012) and Toth v. Parish 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16116 (W.D. La. Mar. 2, 2009).