RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Robert Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:21:26 -0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
The media and format has nothing to do with "if a record is a record"  It is all about purpose and content.  A significant percentage of emails, blogs, etc are official records if they meet the business requirement, intentional or otherwise.
That is why companies are going to be in big trouble if this new on-slot of electronic messages are not clearly defined and controlled.  E-mail all over again but worst.
 
 
Robert
 
Dr. Robert L. Bailey, CRM, MIT
 
 
 
> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 13:36:09 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Question about a legal case: Is email a record
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> Well it is 'Bama we be talkin bout,
> 
> There was a case in Federal court up to Masshootits way a bit ago. It were regarding a realestate transaction that was done through email. Peter could probably pull it it up fer you. Courts ruled that the emails were records and were binding. Go figer. Guess ya just got ta know yer jurisdictions, dependin on which side of the fence you are on.
> 
> Chris Flynn
> 
> > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 11:19:39 -0800
> > From: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Question about a legal case: Is email a record
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > 
> > I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to review the Alabama bankruptcy case referenced below (In re: Western Health Care, LLC, Chapter 11 debtor)
> > 
> > http://tinyurl.com/4fexlou
> > 
> > The case seems to hinge on the legality of renewing a lease by email. The court appears to say no. I have extracted some of the courts reasoning below
> > 
> > "Although informal, it is difficult to read the email-exchange between the parties and conclude other than that they both agreed to an extension of the Lease; however, does the email-exchange constitute a writing sufficient to satisfy Section 2.02? The Court could locate no decision based on Alabama law regarding whether email-correspondence satisfies a condition expressed in the parties' original written contract that subsequent agreements related to their original contract must also be in writing"
> > 
> > And goes on to say
> > 
> > "Email-correspondence is not a writing in the conventional sense, it is an electronic transmittal of information. In this case the parties email-exchange cannot be elevated beyond a discussion of issues pertaining to the Lease. Before the advent of email, such an exchange would perhaps have taken place over the telephone. If such a telephone conversation had been recorded and later transcribed, the printed transcription would not be considered a writing satisfying a requirement in a previously written contract that an extension of its terms be evidenced by a formal writing. While the parties could have agreed that an email-exchange could constitute a writing sufficient to satisfy the terms of the Lease, they did not choose to do so. The Court will not casually ignore the bargained-for contract provision requiring that an extension of the Lease be evidenced by the parties' written agreement-a tangible written document with signatures-to do otherwise fosters uncertainty with regard to the status of important contractual obligations."
> > 
> > I was wondering if anyone knew if this decision is related to specifics of state law or it might have broader application in the view that email correspondence may not be generally relied upon to document a transaction.
> > 
> > 
> > David B. Gaynon
> > [log in to unmask]
> > Huntington Beach CA, USA
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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]
> 
> 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]
 		 	   		  
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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2