RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 26 Mar 2007 09:58:15 -0500
Reply-To:
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From:
Tom Wilson <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
Gary,

I guess it would depend on the benefit you derive from including it on
documents.  All things being equal I'd rather not provide more information
than is requested unintentionally by including it.  Your structure could
change over time which might leave inaccurate information.  The new rules
require parties to discuss issues of electronic discovery and come to
agreement in advance and where there's disagreement, the judge will decide,
but I don't believe this is the same as always giving the opposing counsel a
complete picture of your entire electronic filing system.  Specifically, I'm
thinking of path statements.  You could expose higher levels of structure
which are part of the path statement, but might expose information about
your structure which could give opposing counsel ideas.  While their ideas
may not be correct, never forget it's about what they can represent and not
always what is absolute fact.

Again, it's a risk management decision depending on the benefit you derive
operationally from the inclusion of the information.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Link, Gary M.
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 6:42 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [RM] FRCP Amendments

Several years ago we discussed at our firm the issue of printing the
filepath on documents. We were advised at the time to decide against this
practice. The reason given was that it would give opposing counsel too much
of a window into our network filing system.

With the new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, you are now required (in
federal cases only) to give opposing counsel a pretty complete picture of
you entire electronic records filing system in a pre-discovery conference.
So I'm wondering if that eliminates the above-mentioned argument for not
putting the filepath on printed documents.

Any thoughts?

Gary Link, CRM
Corporate Records Manager
Astorino
227 Fort Pitt Blvd.
Pittsburgh, PA  15222
(412) 765-1700
www.Astorino.com

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

ATOM RSS1 RSS2