An interesting post over at Workplace Privacy Counsel about the ethical obligation of counsel where a witness maintains a social networking site such as Facebook where they have limited access to "friends". According to the post:
The way in which you proceed to gain access to the information on a Facebook or other social networking site could raise issues. It's an interesting discussion without doubt particularly in light of recent case law dealing with the disclosure of an individuals social networking activities in the context of litigation.
There's a more recent endorsement of Master Haberman on April 14, 2009 about whether a plaintiff should deliver a Supplementary Affidavit of Documents including relevant Facebook production. The motion was brought less than a month before trial and the motion was dismissed in the circumstances.
An attorney who is not on the user’s “friends list,” in theory, could
effectively circumvent the user’s gatekeeping by asking a third party
to send a friend request to the user. Many social networking users are
not particularly selective when it comes to making “friends.”
The way in which you proceed to gain access to the information on a Facebook or other social networking site could raise issues. It's an interesting discussion without doubt particularly in light of recent case law dealing with the disclosure of an individuals social networking activities in the context of litigation.
There's a more recent endorsement of Master Haberman on April 14, 2009 about whether a plaintiff should deliver a Supplementary Affidavit of Documents including relevant Facebook production. The motion was brought less than a month before trial and the motion was dismissed in the circumstances.
