Ana,

From my e-Discovery perspective… the custodian is typically 'the
individual that has control, ownership, or immediate responsibility of
the record in question'. It may also be defined as a group or object
if the ownership is broad. (Like a public record)

This is a broad statement, but I don't see how narrowing it to
specifics (technology usage like sent and received functions in email)
would benefit the organization. I believe it's important to understand
that the custodian will change as it moves though a process and the
process is not over when the email is sent or received…Take this
example of a non-electronic record

Bob is writing a letter to Joe = Bob is the custodian
Letter is sent via the postal service = Postal service is the custodian (broad)
Letter is received by Jill the receptionist = Jill the receptionist is
the custodian
Letter is given to the Joe = Joe is the custodian
Joe files the letter in a file cabinet that is open for company use =
The Company is the custodian (broad)

The file cabinet would not be the custodian because it does not define
an individual or group of people. However, when dealing with
electronic records it is not uncommon to list a file share as a
custodian. This is accepted because the share has assigned permission
and can reasonably define a group of people.

From an e-discovery perspective the custodian is not who sent or
received an email. It's who has ownership of the email at the time of
collections. It is important to know who sent and received an email,
but it is equally important to know what records the individual
possessed.

Not to ramble…take this example of what you possess is not necessarily
what you sent or received.

Say a departing manager copied some of his client correspondents to a
PST file (outlook native archive file) so his successor could load it
into outlook for reference. The successor is now the Custodian of
those records, not who sent or received the email. In a legal case it
may be important to know what information the successor had access to
or what s/he read. During the collection process if the e-Discovery
team used sent/received as a way to identify custodian, all that email
would be misclassified.

I don't know if this was of any help for your situation…

Robert






On 11/15/07, Aquino-Perez, Ana <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> We are developing best practices for email records and have run into some
> discussion regarding the custodian of the email record. We seem to have some
> disagreements about it. If you have any email records policies , best
> practices and or guidelines in your  organizations, could you share with me
> how you define /determine who is the custodian of the email record?  The
> contenders we have are: the sender, the  main recipient or recipient/s that
> take action on behalf of the  organization. I'm interested in seeing what
> you have, what are your policies and best practices, and also to know how
> or if  they have worked for you. Any information you can provide would be
> appreciated. Thanks much.
>
> Ana Aquino-Pérez
> WisDOT Records Officer
> 4802 Sheboygan Ave Rm. 104
> PO Box 7915
> Madison, WI 53707-7915
> Tel.: 608-266-5290
> Fax: 608-261-6306
> E-mail:  <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> "Don't assume that is too late to get involved."  Morrie Schwartz

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]