LISTSERV - RECMGMT-L Archives - LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

	LISTSERV Archives
	RECMGMT-L Home

	Log In
	Register

	Subscribe or Unsubscribe

	Search Archives

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 >>]

Sender:	Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:35:36 -0400
Content-Disposition:	inline
Reply-To:	Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:	Re: Legal Requirements was Re: [RM] RECMGMT-L Digest - 17 Jun 2007 to 18 Jun 2007 (#2007-168)
MIME-Version:	1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:	7bit
In-Reply-To:	<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type:	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
From:	Peter Kurilecz <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:	text/plain (26 lines)

On 6/21/07, Link, Gary M. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Right on, Peter. When I give RIM presentations I break "Legal" down into three categories
>
> - Statutory/regulatory
> - Contractual
> - Litgation-related: FRCP/discovery, Federal Rules of Evidence, statutes of limitations, and related issues

the latter is the wild card in the equation. This goes to the issue
that Hugh Smith raised ie data mapping. If one were to examine past
discovery requests one should be able to identify the types of records
(or to use the term attorneys prefer documents) most likely to be
requested. So if it is an HR lawsuit such as unfair termination what
would be the most likely records requested, what systems would be
involved. The same for contract disputes (these are rhetorical
questions and examples are not necessarily needed, but think about
them)

-- 
Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
Richmond, Va

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.IGGURU.US