Legal Insight
Attorneys at Law
Necessary Ingredients for Sound Legal Holds
Scott A. Wandstrat
A version of this article previously appeared in the Fulton County Daily Report.
Whenever e-discovery and healthcare litigation and investigations come up, you can almost always
count on the topic to include a discussion of sanctions. That’s not an accident. There has been
an uptick in both the volume of filings asking for discovery sanctions and orders granting those
requests. And, for better or for worse, these trends don’t seem to be at risk of abating.
The most common ground for these filings? A failure to take reasonable steps to preserve
potentially relevant documents and data. Lawyers that aren’t mindful of their preservation
obligations may expose their clients, and themselves, to significant sanctions because they didn’t
take appropriate steps under the circumstances to ensure that potentially relevant information is
preserved.
The best protection against the threat of sanctions is to institute a legal hold—i.e., to take prompt,
affirmative, and reasonable steps to ensure that your client is properly preserving potentially
relevant information. As you probably know, the legal hold starts with the prompt distribution of the
eponymous legal hold memo. (Be careful not to think of this memo as the beginning and end—it’s
better to think of the legal hold not as a single box to be checked, but a process that spans the life
of any particular matter.)
At its most basic, the memo is the directive sent to each person with control over information that is
in your client’s possession, custody, or control—a/k/a a “custodian”—that explains to them (in plain
English—for example, steering clear of words like “eponymous”), the who, what, when, why, and
how of preservation.
Of course, the legal hold memo should avoiding sending the message that everyone that might
have anything should just save everything forever. While that might be easier in the short-term, it’s
neither practical nor in any healthcare company’s best interest to try to save everything. Preserving
information comes with both hard and soft costs, ranging from storage space and operability of
computer networks to the business interruption and hassle of having to wade through an everexpanding sea of data.
So if the “save everything” approach is out, what should the legal hold notice say? Let’s talk about
the who, what, when, why, and how, which will of course depend on the circumstances and the
particular controversy at issue:
■■ The Who. To figure out who needs to receive the legal hold notice, you’ll need to invest
some time at the outset to figure out what the matter is about and what people have control
over the relevant documents or systems. If you have a complaint, demand letter, or subpoena, start there. With that rough sketch, it’s a best practice to then follow-up with interviews to talk with key players, figuring out not just what their perspective is on the merits of
the controversy, but also where potentially relevant information might reside. And when you
are doing this, don’t forget that your employees are just one possible group of custodians.
There may be third parties—lawyers, accountants, etc.—that need to receive the legal hold
notice.
■■ The What. Obviously, you should take care to explain what the dispute is about and what
categories of information need to be preserved. The goal, of course, is to arm the recipients
www.agg.com
Page 1
Legal Insight
Attorneys at Law
of the hold with the information they need to realistically determine whether any particular piece of information
is subject to the hold. This is the part of the memo that should be edited ruthlessly. Does the custodian need to
know the case style or where the lawsuit is pending? Will the custodian understand what “misappropriation of
trade secrets” means, or should you just say that Company X claims we stole secret information about their Shiny
New Product? In terms of the categories of information that should be preserved, good practice is to define these
broadly, so that the custodian does not have to make a series of fine distinctions to figure out whether a particular
document needs to be preserved.
■■ The When. The custodians should know that their immediate compliance with the hold is expected. But the timing
of things also comes into play in terms of the preservation obligation. Is this a dispute where you only need documents from months or years ago? Or is potentially relevant information continuing to be generated? It’s important
to educate custodians to the nature of the obligation and how it might impact their decision-making when it comes
to disposing of any information.
■■ The How. One of the frustrating parts of e-discovery is that sometimes well-intentioned custodians can end up
altering the data that they are supposed to be preserving. Seemingly harmless steps, such as moving the information to a new location, for example, can alter the metadata of that document. In those cases where that kind
of metadata is relevant, an adversary can assert a spoliation claim simply based on the effort made to meet its
preservation obligations. The more cautious approach is to advise the custodians to preserve the data that they
have “in place,” so that if necessary, you can engage more experienced technologists to extract the information
in a way that won’t alter the metadata at all—that’s what people typically mean when they refer to a “forensicallysound collection.”
■■ The Why. The legal hold memo should also explain why preserving data is important. In addition to holding onto
information that could help your case, preserving potentially relevant information avoids costly battles about spoliation, adverse inferences, monetary penalties, and, in the case of Government investigations, the possibility of
an obstruction of justice charge.
Of course, no legal hold memo is perfect. They are, by necessity, issued early in the litigation lifecycle, when the
landscape of the dispute may still be hazy and undefined. So when it comes to crafting the initial legal hold memo, don’t
let perfect become the enemy of the good. The standard imposed by the discovery rules is one of reasonableness, not
perfection.
Once you’ve sent the initial legal hold, remember your work is not necessarily done. As more about the dispute is
discovered, or as the focus of the litigation shifts, the legal hold should be revised as necessary. Moreover, even when
things don’t change, the best practice is to remind custodians about the preservation obligations periodically throughout
litigation or an investigation, because the duty to preserve is an ongoing one.
www.agg.com
Page 2
Legal Insight
Attorneys at Law
Authors and Contributors
Scott A. Wandstrat
Partner, Atlanta Office
404.873.8764
[email protected]
not if, but how.
®
About Arnall Golden Gregory LLP
Arnall Golden Gregory, a law firm with more than 150 attorneys in Atlanta and Washington, DC, employs a “business sensibility”
approach, developing a deep understanding of each client’s industry and situation in order to find a customized, cost-sensitive
solution, and then continuing to help them stay one step ahead. Selected for The National Law Journal’s prestigious 2013
Midsize Hot List, the firm offers corporate, litigation and regulatory services for numerous industries, including healthcare, life
sciences, global logistics and transportation, real estate, food distribution, financial services, franchising, consumer products and
services, information services, energy and manufacturing. AGG subscribes to the belief “not if, but how.®” Visit www.agg.com.
Atlanta Office
171 17th Street, NW
Suite 2100
Atlanta, GA 30363
Washington, DC Office
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20006
To subscribe to future alerts, insights and newsletters: http://www.agg.com/subscribe/
©2015. Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. This legal insight provides a general summary of recent legal developments. It is not intended to be,
and should not be relied upon as, legal advice. Under professional rules, this communication may be considered advertising material.
www.agg.com
Page 3