Category Archives: Confidentiality

Law Firm Email Encryption – Are You Ethically Compliant?

11 Thursday May 2017

Posted by in Clouds, Confidentiality, Emails, Ethics Opinions, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Rules of Professional Responsibility, Technology, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

ABA Issues New Ethics Opinion on Encryption of Attorney-Client Email, Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog

http://bit.ly/2qy8J2a

Does your state have an ethics opinion about encryption of your firm’s email? Do you use encryption? Do you use a secure cloud based platform? If you are not sure, don’t you think you should check?

Most law firms frequently use email over fax and regular mail to communicate with their clients, their expert witnesses, and opposing counsel. What is your obligation to ensure confidentiality of your firm’s email, and are you meeting it?

The ABA’s ethics opinion is instructive, as well as the Texas ethics legal opinion referred to by Mr. Calloway at the end of his post. -CCE

Do You Use the Cloud for Document Storage or Production? Read This First.

28 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by in Attorney Work Product, Attorney-Client Privilege, Clouds, Confidentiality, Discovery, Dropbox, Emails, Encryption, Evidence, Insurance Defense, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Litigation, Passwords, Privilege and Confidentiality, Requests for Production, Sanctions, Subpoena Duces Tecum

≈ Comments Off on Do You Use the Cloud for Document Storage or Production? Read This First.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Upload To File-Sharing Site Was Like Leaving Legal File On A Bench, Judge Says; Privilege Is Waived, by Debra Cassens Weiss, ABA Journal©

http://bit.ly/2mxwEcF

Many use the cloud for file storage and sharing when attachments are too big to send by email. If you use the cloud for storage, file-sharing or transfer, document management, project management, or anything similar, here is a cautionary tale.

The plaintiff insurance company sued the defendants, and sought a declaratory judgment on the defendants’ claim of loss by fire. The plaintiff’s investigator uploaded the entire claims file, including surveillance footage, to a drop-box cloud, Box, Inc. The link had no encryption or password. Access to the link alone allowed anyone to see the file.

He then sent the link by email to the plaintiff insurance company, who sent it to the insurance company’s attorneys, who inadvertently sent it the defendants’ counsel in response to a subpoena duces tecum.

The defendants’ counsel looked at it, but didn’t tell the plaintiff they had seen the privileged and confidential information. Inevitably, the defense sent the information back on a thumb drive to the plaintiff’s attorneys during discovery.

After vigorous arguments about confidentiality, work-product doctrine, attorney-client privilege, and disqualification of defense counsel, the facts and court’s reasoning make this an interesting read. -CCE

We Should Know Better.

07 Sunday Aug 2016

Posted by in Confidentiality, Legal Ethics, Rules of Professional Responsibility

≈ Comments Off on We Should Know Better.

Tags

, , , ,

Don’t Reveal Embarrassing Client Info, Cal. Bar Warns, by Casey C. Sullivan, Esq., FindLaw (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://bit.ly/2aFqJOQ

I hope that everyone learned in paralegal or law school that you don’t talk in elevators, restaurants, and any other public place about clients and other embarrassing facts you may pick up along the way.  I once worked in a building with a popular restaurant on the top floor. We were close enough to the courthouse that lawyers often went there for lunch. It was amazing how many settlement discussions I heard in the elevator. It wasn’t hard to guess which case it was either.

We all have great war stories. Funny things that happened in court or depositions – things like that. Yes, truth is often funnier than fiction. Maybe thinking of it from the client’s perspective is helpful. If you were the client, would you want your attorney making your case the butt of a joke or story told in public? – CCE

Legal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest – What Is Your Professional Duty?

19 Sunday Jul 2015

Posted by in Confidentiality, Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest, Ethics, Lawyer Supervision, Legal Ethics, Paralegals/Legal Assistants, Rules of Professional Responsibility, Supervising Support Staff

≈ Comments Off on Legal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest – What Is Your Professional Duty?

Tags

, ,

Regardless of whether you are a lawyer, judge, or paralegal, have you kept a list of every case on which you have worked? Does it include all the parties or only your client?

Christine Simmons recently posted an interesting article in the New York Law Journal in which the Court disqualified a White Plains attorney’s representation of his client. The attorney’s paralegal had, in the past, been involved with the opposing party. For this reason, the Court ruled to vacate the settlement due to tainted negotiations.

So back to my original question – when you were hired, did anyone ask you to look at the firm’s active client list to determine whether you had a conflict of interest? Shouldn’t this especially be the case if your practice is limited to only one or two specific areas of law where you often get repeat business from your clients?

Often, when a firm signs on a new client, it will run a conflict check through its database. It likely also sends an email to all the attorneys asking whether any have a conflict with this particular client. Are support staff and/or the IT Department included in this inquiry? Shouldn’t they if they will have access to the file or any communication with the client, regardless of what role they play in the preparation of the case?

Although every legal professional, lawyer and paralegal, are aware of their ethical obligation to confidentiality and conflicts of interest, how many of us have a complete list of every client and/or parties in each case we have ever worked? Should we? -CCE

Another Major Hack. Checked Your Law Firm’s Cyber Security Lately?

05 Friday Jun 2015

Posted by in Computer Forensics, Confidentiality, Cybersecurity, Disaster Preparedness, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Technology, Technology

≈ Comments Off on Another Major Hack. Checked Your Law Firm’s Cyber Security Lately?

Tags

, , , , ,

The Real Reason You Need Cyber Liability Insurance, by Brian Focht, The Cyber Advocate

http://tinyurl.com/p8y5k2y

Another day, another hack. Yesterday brought news that four million current and former government employees may have had their personal information stolen by Chinese hackers.

Of course, this comes on the heels of what has been a staggering 18 months of hacks. Starting with the Home Depot and Target hacks, we’ve been barraged with story after story about major companies and retailers being hacked for their customers’ data. It’s not just big companies and big-box retailers, though. Law firms are increasingly the target of hackers, due to a combination of factors including relatively lax security and large quantities of organized, valuable information. . . .

Continue reading →

Don’t Have A PIN Lock On Your Phone? Hope Your Malpractice Insurance Is Up To Date.

16 Monday Feb 2015

Posted by in Android Phones, Attorney Discipline, Blackberry Phones, Cell Phones, Confidentiality, Cybersecurity, E-Filing, Emails, iPad, iPhones, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Malpractice, Office Procedures, Passwords, Rules of Professional Responsibility, Supervising Support Staff, Technology, Technology

≈ Comments Off on Don’t Have A PIN Lock On Your Phone? Hope Your Malpractice Insurance Is Up To Date.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Most Consumers Don’t Lock Mobile Phone Via PIN, by Ed Hansberry, DARKReading, InformationWeek©

http://tinyurl.com/plw76ut

My guess is that most people who use a smart phone access some kind of confidential information, such as your bank account or conversations with a client or the office. If you do not have a PIN lock on your smart phone, this truly is special kind of stupid.

This is not a hard one to understand. If you use your cell phone to communicate with clients, sync your phone to your office computer and docket, or attach yourself to your office and confidential information – without taking simple, basic security measures – you are  inviting a dangerous breach of confidentiality. -CCE

44% of respondents say it’s too much of a hassle, new survey reports.

People put a lot of sensitive info on their phones, but they often give little though to how secure their data is. In a survey by a security company, over half of the respondents said they didn’t bother with a PIN lock. This takes on a whole new dimension when you begin to understand how many of these people keep corporate data on the device.

Losing an unlocked phone can be far worse than losing a wallet. Emails on the device alone can reveal a wealth of information about the person, including where they bank, where they live, names of family members, and more. If company email is on the device, and it often is, there can be competitive information, salaries, system passwords, etc. If any of those emails contain links, often clicking on it will take you into the website, be it Facebook or a corporate portal.

According to Confident Technologies, 65% of users have corporate data on their phone, even though only 10% actually have a corporate issued device.

For that majority that don’t lock their phone at all, 44% said it is too much of a hassle to lock it and 30% said they weren’t worried about security. These are likely the same people that store things like social security numbers, passwords, and other sensitive information in text files or basic note applications. They may even store their computer’s password on a Post-It Note in their center desk drawer. . . .

Continue reading →

You Could Be Unintentionally Violating Client Confidentiality In Public.

10 Tuesday Feb 2015

Posted by in Confidentiality, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Technology

≈ Comments Off on You Could Be Unintentionally Violating Client Confidentiality In Public.

Tags

, , , , ,

If You Are Reading This Over Public Wi-Fi, You Are Probably Putting Your Clients’ Information At Risk, Lawyerist Insider, Lawyerist.com©

http://tinyurl.com/ltl8fox

Most legal professionals know that conversations about a client’s case should never happen in a public place. Regardless, there are times when we seem to forget. If you have ever eaten in a popular restaurant close to the courthouse, then I will bet you’ve overheard trial and settlement strategy openly discussed within earshot during lunchtime. This post discusses what should be obvious – keep all confidential information about clients private, not public. -CCE

On several occasions, I have overheard lawyers talking very loudly on the phone to their clients. Coffee shops, of course, but courthouse bathroom stalls seem to be an especially popular place to hold attorney-client phone conversations at length and in great detail, quite loudly. While inadvertent disclosure does not void the privilege, talking loudly from a public bathroom stall is only ‘inadvertent disclosure’ in the sense that the lawyer is a dumbass.

Using public wi-fi without taking appropriate security precautions isn’t quite as bad as discussing settlement strategy in the bathroom at opposing counsel’s firm, but it’s not too far from it. A couple of weeks ago I was curious to see how easy it actually is to see what other people connected to a public wi-fi router are doing. I found out it is really easy. In a couple of minutes, I got explicit instructions that let me scan the network for other computers, pick one, and see the websites it was accessing. I didn’t even have to install anything on my MacBook.

It’s so easy that you could do it, too. It’s so easy that plenty of people are doing it, every day, probably on the public wi-fi networks you use.

Before you send or receive client information over a public wi-fi network (by email, for example, unless you know your email connection is secured), read Lisa’s post, ‘Beware Public Wi-Fi When Accessing Client Information.’ Don’t be the lawyer talking loudly in a public bathroom — er, wi-fi network.

Time For A New Office Computer?

19 Monday Jan 2015

Posted by in Apple, Computer Forensics, Confidentiality, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, PC Computers, Technology, Technology

≈ Comments Off on Time For A New Office Computer?

Tags

, , , , , ,

Give Away your Computer, Revisited, by Craig Ball, Ball In Your Court

https://ballinyourcourt.wordpress.com/2015/01/14/give-away-your-computer-revisited/

This is the fourth in a series revisiting Ball in Your Court columns and posts from the primordial past of e-discovery–updating and critiquing in places, and hopefully restarting a few conversations. As always, your comments are gratefully solicited.

Give Away Your Computer 

[Originally published in Law Technology News, July 2005]

With the price of powerful computer systems at historic lows, who isn’t tempted to upgrade? But, what do you do with a system you’ve been using if it’s less than four or five-years old and still has some life left in it? Pass it on to a friend or family member or donate it to a school or civic organization and you’re ethically obliged to safeguard client data on the hard drive. Plus, you’ll want to protect your personal data from identity thieves and snoopers. Hopefully you already know that deleting confidential files and even formatting the drive does little to erase your private information—it’s like tearing out the table of contents but leaving the rest of the book. How do you be a Good Samaritan without jeopardizing client confidences and personal privacy? . . . .

Continue reading →

What Is A “Zero Knowledge” Cloud And Why You Should Care.

24 Wednesday Dec 2014

Posted by in Clouds, Confidentiality, Document Retention, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Malpractice, Technology, Technology

≈ Comments Off on What Is A “Zero Knowledge” Cloud And Why You Should Care.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

‘Zero Knowledge’ Encrypted Cloud Service Sees Business Boom, by Steven Nelson, U.S. News & World Report

http://tinyurl.com/q9fj4l8

If you have been paying attention, you have heard about “zero knowledge” clouds — and you are thinking about changing from Drop Box or other clouds that can access the information you put in them. If you know nothing about zero knowledge clouds, don’t stop here. Read more about them, and decide whether it is time for your firm to change to a more secure cloud platform. -CCE

File-storing service SpiderOak says it’s experiencing a business boom – rapidly nearing one million users and doubling its site metrics in six months – amid a constant trickle of news reports revealing Internet surveillance by the government.

Files stored using SpiderOak are encrypted and their contents unknown – and unknowable – to the company. Sharing such files will soon be ‘zero knowledge,’ too, as the company prepares to roll out Crypton, its open source app-building framework, which will be publicly available within the next couple months.

‘Essentially what we did was we inverted the Internet,’ says CEO Ethan Oberman. ‘We created a world where the server is actually a big dumb machine. It only sees encrypted data blocks.’

A free version of the file-hosting service offers 2 GB of storage in exchange for a name, email address, username and password.

‘We don’t really fact check that information,’ Oberman says.

The company does know the IP address of users, he says, but IP-masking browsers – such as Tor – can conceal that information as well, making it possible to store files without disclosing any identifying information.

If the government were to come to the company with a valid legal demand for data, Oberman says, ‘We could turn over the data, but it is literally in encrypted data blocks and not decryptable by us. The only way it’s decryptable is if you have the key, which we do not maintain.’ . . .

Is Email Between You And Your Client Safe? No, And This Is Why.

01 Monday Dec 2014

Posted by in Android Phones, Apple, Blackberry Phones, Clouds, Confidentiality, Emails, Encryption, iPad, iPhones, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Malpractice, PC Computers, Technology

≈ Comments Off on Is Email Between You And Your Client Safe? No, And This Is Why.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

How to Encrypt Attorney-Client Communications, by Lisa Needham, Lawyerist Blog (with hat tip to Allen Mihecoby, CLAS, RP!)

http://tinyurl.com/kfrpqz3

If you have decided you need to get serious about client data protection, you will need to consider encrypting both your data and your communications. We have previously covered how to encrypt your data and will focus here on how to encrypt your email communication.

What Is Encryption?

Simply by using the Internet, you are probably using some sort of encryption scheme during some activities, whether you know it or not.

Encryption is simply the act of turning your data into unreadable gibberish. If your data is intercepted or hacked, the thief now has nothing but a pile of garbage.

End-to-end encryption is a must for transferring sensitive data across the internet. In end-to-end encryption, your data is encrypted while it travels towards your intended location and the same encryption occurs on the reverse trip. Your bank (hopefully) uses end-to-end encryption. Your practice management software (hopefully) uses end-to-end encryption if it stores and syncs data remotely. This sort of encryption is done for you without any effort on your part, as it is just a standard feature of the infrastructure you are using to bank or update client data or similar activities.

Why Do You Need to Care?

A few years ago, the ABA issued a formal ethics opinion stating that if there is a significant risk that a third party might gain access to the email, attorneys have to warn clients about that risk.

This poses a problem, because unlike your bank and practice management software, email is usually unencrypted. This is true whether you are using a desktop client or a web-based email like GMail. . . .

Do You Ever CC Clients On Emails? Here’s Why You Shouldn’t.

28 Friday Nov 2014

Posted by in Confidentiality, Emails, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Malpractice, Office Procedures, Rules of Professional Responsibility

≈ Comments Off on Do You Ever CC Clients On Emails? Here’s Why You Shouldn’t.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Don’t CC Clients on Emails, by Sam Glover, Lawyerist Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mrm3ucz

This one seems like a no-brainer, but I suspect many lawyers and paralegals alike have not realized the danger in this practice. -CCE

As a general rule, you should not CC your clients on emails.

First, because it gives every other recipient a chance to communicate directly with your client. In fact, it looks like an invitation to do so. Opposing counsel should know better, but even they might use Reply All accidentally, accidentally-on-purpose, or maybe even intending — albeit misguidedly — to be helpful.

In the case of recipients who are not bound by the rules of professional responsibility, you can hardly be surprised if they take the inclusion of your client’s email address as an invitation to keep them in the conversation or communicate with them directly. And remember that the recipient might forward your email, giving anyone not already included the chance to do so. This could be harmless if your email is related to a friendly business transaction. It could also be disastrous.

Don’t forget that clients can make mistakes, too. Even if you BCC your client to avoid the above problems, it could be your client who uses Reply All.

Second, part of your job is to counsel your client, which is difficult to do without providing at least a sentence or two of summary or context or explanation. If all you do is CC your client on every email (or forward every email with little more than “FYI”), you are missing a chance to do your job.

The better practice is usually to wait until the end of the discussion (or at least a decision point), so you can bring your client up to speed with a brief summary, some context, your analysis, the options you need to discuss, etc. Go ahead and include all the back-and-forth if you like, but don’t just hand it off. It is safe to assume given the fact of your representation that your client wants you to use your legal acumen to help them understand what is going on.

So don’t CC your client. There are certainly some exceptions to this ‘rule,’ or times when it doesn’t really matter. But at a minimum you should think twice before adding your client to the CC or BCC field of an email you are about to send.

When Working Freelance, Get An Agreement In Writing.

30 Thursday Oct 2014

Posted by in Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest, Legal Ethics, Malpractice

≈ Comments Off on When Working Freelance, Get An Agreement In Writing.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Get It In Writing: Freelance Attorney Work Agreement, by Emerald Gratz, Lawyerist Blog

http://tinyurl.com/ntjd2gk

A quick word to paralegals who consider freelance work. Please remember that only lawyers can give legal advice. Except for specific circumstances provided by state or federal statutes, a non-lawyer cannot appear in court on behalf of someone else. If you work freelance, please review and follow the ethical requirements for our profession when working freelance. –CCE

The question of whether the work of a freelance attorney requires a written agreement seems obvious at first glance — “get it in writing” is the golden rule, after all. In practice it is not always that simple. There may be situations, depending on the client, project, or timetable, where getting a written freelance work agreement is not possible or necessary. If a hiring attorney is looking for last-minute emergency assistance, there may not be time to negotiate an agreement. Or the hiring attorney and freelance attorney may have an existing relationship and are comfortable working without a formal agreement.

In these situations, it still benefits both sides to set forth basic project terms in an email, at least. Ultimately, the freelance attorney is responsible for defining the business relationship and running his or her own freelance law practice. . . .

Is It Time For A “Bring Your Own Device” Policy for Your Law Office?

01 Tuesday Jul 2014

Posted by in Android Phones, Apple, Blackberry Phones, Cell Phones, Clouds, Computer Forensics, Confidentiality, Cybersecurity, Disaster Preparedness, Emails, Encryption, Google, Intellectual Property, iPad, iPhones, Law Office Management, Legal Blogs, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Mac, Management, Marketing, Passwords, PC Computers, Social Media, Supervising Support Staff, Tablets, Technology, Using Social Media

≈ Comments Off on Is It Time For A “Bring Your Own Device” Policy for Your Law Office?

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mobile Device Security for Lawyers: How Solos and Small Firms can Ethically Allow Bring Your Own Device, by Will Harrelson, Curo Legal Blog (with hat tip to Jeff Richardson, iPhone J.D. Blog!)

http://tinyurl.com/lrrnp7g

The Start of Bring Your Own Device Policies

It really is the iPhone’s fault. Yes, Apple is to blame for designing the most desirable piece of technology of the last decade. So desirable, in fact, that employees of all stripes requested (and, often, begged) their IT departments to toss the increasingly-‘corporate’ Blackberry out the window and allow the use of their personal iPhones for corporate emails and calls. As a result, we have been living in the age of ‘Bring Your Own Device’ where employees use a single personal mobile phone (or tablet) for both their personal email, texting, and social media while also using it for work email, word processing, and other enterprise applications.

Before the Bring Your Own Device era, a company’s greatest out-of-office security concern was an employee who left a briefcase in a taxi. Today, the worry is an employee misplacing a device the size of wallet containing almost limitless amounts of data that criminals or hackers would easily and quickly exploit if given the chance. Clearly, there is an obvious financial motivation for all businesses to protect their own or customer’s sensitive data.

However, lawyers face particular ethical consequences if they fail to take reasonable efforts to either investigate the technologies that they implement or protect their client’s confidential information. . . .

Use Safe Smart Pro App to Secure Your Sensitive Data.

14 Saturday Jun 2014

Posted by in Apple, Apps, Cell Phones, Confidentiality, iPad, iPhones, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

App of the Week: Smart Safe Pro – Secure Sensitive Data on Your iPhone, by Lisa Pansini, Legal Productivity Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lxzhvrw

Regardless of whether you use your iPhone for docketing or receive emails from clients, legal ethics require that information about your clients be treated as confidential. And guess what, there’s an app for that. -CCE

Smartphone data is sacred to many. The mere thought of another human being infiltrating the privacy of their devices is enough to bring them to their knees. Rejoice, over-protective iOS user, for there is Smart Safe Pro ($2.99).

Secured with a AES-256 encryption, Smart Safe Pro operates as your digital vault, allowing you to secure passwords, photos, credit cards, and other documents. All this can be done without having to put a password lock on your device (but you can still have one if you really want it!)

You can choose between a PIN code, dot lock, numeric or alphanumeric passcode. The app can also send break-in reports with photo and GPS data via email, just in case someone tries to worm their way into your private data (requires in-app purchase). As if that wasn’t enough, the app also comes with a decoy login mode to throw potential snoopers for a loop. . . .

When You Share Files, Are They Secure?

31 Saturday May 2014

Posted by in Clouds, Confidentiality, Cybersecurity, Dropbox, Emails, Encryption, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Technology

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

File Sharing by Lawyers Largely Insecure, Survey Suggests, by Robert Ambrogi, Robert Ambrogi’s Law Sites

http://tinyurl.com/pr3apcc

If I were to leave a document on a table entitled, ‘My Deepest, Darkest Secrets,’ under which I wrote, ‘Please do not read this unless you are someone I intended to read this,’ how securely would you think I’d protected myself?

That, effectively, is all the majority of lawyers do to protect confidential documents they share with clients and colleagues, according to a LexisNexis survey published this week. . . .

A Double Treat – Two-Part Posts On Cybersecurity and Outsourcing From Ralph Losey.

19 Monday May 2014

Posted by in Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Computer Virus, Confidentiality, Document Retention, Emails, Encryption, Heartbleed, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Malpractice, Malware, Technology, Technology, Trojans

≈ Comments Off on A Double Treat – Two-Part Posts On Cybersecurity and Outsourcing From Ralph Losey.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

The Importance of Cybersecurity to the Legal Profession and Outsourcing as a Best Practice – Part One, by Ralph Losey, e-Discovery Team®

http://tinyurl.com/oalblet

and,

The Importance of Cybersecurity to the Legal Profession and Outsourcing as a Best Practice – Part Two, by Ralph Losey, e-Discovery Team®

http://tinyurl.com/mjek896

It is worth taking the time to read the Comments for both Part One and Part Two. -CCE

A Lesson in Attorney-Client Privilege.

30 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Attorney-Client Privilege, Confidentiality, Discovery, Legal Ethics, Requests for Production

≈ Comments Off on A Lesson in Attorney-Client Privilege.

Tags

, , , , ,

Judge Wettick: Attorney-Client Privilege Does Not Continue For Defunct Companies, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK Blog

http://www.torttalk.com/2014/03/judge-wettick-attorney-client-privilege.html

In his recent decision in the case of Red Vision Systems, Inc. et al. v. National Real Estate Information Services, L.P, et al., No. GD – 13 – 008572 (C.P. Allegh. Co. Feb. 26, 2014 Wettick, J.), Judge Wettick dealt with the novel issue of the application of the attorney-client privilege in the context of a request for the production of documents propounded upon a dissolved/non-operating company.

After a thorough review of the scope of the attorney-client privilege, Judge Wettick ultimately ruled that the privilege did not extend to corporations that were no longer in business.  Accordingly, a former in-house counsel for several defunct companies was ordered to turn over documents in discovery related to status of the companies’ assets. . . .

If Your Copier Has A Hard Drive, Is Its Stored Data Susceptible to E-Discovery?

09 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Confidentiality, Databases, Discovery, E-Discovery, Law Office Management, Legal Ethics, Legal Technology, Litigation Hold, Metadata, Native Format, Office Procedures, Preservation, Sanctions, Technology

≈ Comments Off on If Your Copier Has A Hard Drive, Is Its Stored Data Susceptible to E-Discovery?

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Be Aware: Copying Machines Can Have Hard Drives And Store Copies – That’s Potential Out-Of-The-Box Discovery, by Adolph J. Levy, Out-Of-The-Box Lawyering Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mmpkd5h

Did you know that some copying machines have hard drives and store digital copies of the copies they have made? Or that the hard drives could even contain 25,000 copies that have been made? Copier + Hard Drive: A Dangerous Combination.

Lawyers are used to discovering e-mail, but now what about using discovery to find copies that a opposing party made over time? Wouldn’t you like to be at your opponent’s office and see the originals of all the copies that were being made?

Well, now, fortunately — or unfortunately — you might be able to. . . .

Use Wickr To Send Encrypted Information On iOs And Android Phones

05 Tuesday Nov 2013

Posted by in Android Phones, Cell Phones, Confidentiality, Emails, iPhones, Legal Technology

≈ Comments Off on Use Wickr To Send Encrypted Information On iOs And Android Phones

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Send Secure, Self-Destructing Messages with Wickr, by Robert Ambrogi at Robert Ambrogi’s Web Sites

http://bit.ly/HEj6aw

Lawyers have an ethical obligation to protect the confidentiality and security of communications with their clients. The more we learn about NSA snooping, the more we realize what a challenge that can be.