E-discovery: Managing the duty to preserve voicemail

The type of voicemail system a company uses affects what voicemail data it should preserve

Litigants increasingly seek discovery of voicemail. In a matter in which there is a duty to preserve electronically stored information, there may also be a duty to preserve voicemail messages. What should inside counsel do? New voicemail technologies require new ways of thinking about how to comply with a party’s discovery obligations. 

As a threshold matter, in-house counsel should explore whether parties are willing to stipulate that they will not exchange voicemail. Courts typically will respect and enforce such stipulations. However, when parties cannot agree to limit voicemail discovery, courts will focus on the extent to which voicemail messages are reasonably accessible or unduly burdensome to identify, preserve and produce. For example, in the July 2012 case Merial Ltd. v. Velcera, Inc., the Middle District of Georgia District Court decided that voicemail need not be preserved or collected because it was not reasonably accessible.

There are several types of voicemail systems available to companies, and the type of voicemail system a company uses will determine what steps that company should take to preserve voicemail messages. Of course, regardless of your company’s system, if you have reason to believe that voicemail evidence is central to your case, it is important to consider immediately halting the company’s routine deletion schedules, at least as to key witnesses, or to take other steps to preserve the evidence. 

Analog and basic digital systems

Analog systems are increasingly rare. These systems store voicemails on magnetic tape located at the phone company or on tape located at the user’s place of business. Preserving analog voicemail requires making copies of these tapes, or playing the message out loud and recording it onto other recording devices. Once preserved, the process of identifying relevant voicemails can require listening to audio files, which takes time and can become expensive.   

The most basic type of digital voicemail is stored on its own dedicated computer server either at the phone company or at the user’s place of business. The voicemails are accessible through phones, but they are not generally accessible through individual users’ computers. Like analog systems, identifying relevant voicemails on this type of system can be expensive because there is generally no way to isolate relevant messages without reviewing entire audio files. In our view, these costs and burdens provide substantial support for an argument that, except in the rare case, a party should not be required to review and produce analog or basic digital voicemails. 

Email alert

More advanced digital voicemail systems send an email alerting a recipient that a voicemail has arrived. In order to access the voicemail, a user must dial in to the voicemail server through a telephone. Because the emails identify the date and time a voicemail was received, the emails can later be used to isolate relevant voicemail messages on the digital server (assuming the emails and the voicemails were both preserved in their respective locations). This can significantly lower the cost of identifying relevant voicemails, and thus may make the discovery of such voicemails more cost-effective and reasonable.

Email link

Some digital voicemail systems send an email containing a clickable link directly to the voicemail, allowing the user to access the voicemail message directly from a computer. Using the link, users can download voicemails onto their computer and save them as digital audio .WAV files. Because of this ability to download the voicemail directly to a user’s computer, companies that have email access voicemail systems must search beyond the voicemail server when looking to preserve voicemails. 

Email attachment

The most sophisticated voicemail systems automatically send emails attaching digital copies of voicemails to recipients in the form of audio .WAV files. These emails, which typically identify the date and time a voicemail was received, commonly include the caller ID information, which can facilitate a more targeted preservation search, and the voicemails are  stored on email servers (as opposed to voicemail servers) that generally preserve information for longer periods of time than other systems. Companies using this type of system have heightened preservation obligations because the emails (and the voicemail files attached to them) can easily be forwarded and may eventually reside on computers located throughout the company, as well as mobile devices.    

Inside counsel should understand their companies’ voicemail systems so they can effectively preserve necessary voicemails when required. The more information a voicemail system preserves and distributes to its recipients, the easier it may be to identify relevant voicemail messages later, and such systems make it increasingly difficult to argue that a company’s voicemails are not reasonably accessible. Inside counsel should implement a data retention policy in order to minimize the volume of information retained and be sure to suspend that retention policy when necessary to preserve relevant data. 

About the Author
Vincent Syracuse

Vincent Syracuse

Vincent J. Syracuse is Chair of Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt LLP’s Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice. He represents a variety of clients in commercial litigation in all NY State and Federal Courts and is a mediator in the Commercial Division of the NY County Supreme Court. He is recognized by Super Lawyers as a top lawyer in NY Metro from 2006 to 2012.  Vince is reachable at 212.508.6722 or at syracuse@thsh.com

About the Author
Paul Sarkozi

Paul Sarkozi

Paul D. Sarkozi is partner in Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt LLP’s Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice. Recently, Paul was named as one of the Top 100 Lawyers in the NY Metro area for 2012 by Super Lawyers magazine. Paul also serves on the faculty of Columbia Law School.  Paul is reachable at 212.508.7524 or at sarkozi@thsh.com.  

About the Author
George du Pont

George du Pont

George F. du Pont (Geordie) is a partner in Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt’s Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice, which focuses primarily on complex commercial and appellate litigation.  Geordie has argued cases at both the trial court and appellate levels, and has extensive state and federal court experience representing a variety of clients in commercial litigation including cases involving antitrust law, intellectual property and securities litigation. He can be reached at 212.508.6743 or at dupont@thsh.com

About the Author
Matthew Sinkman

Matthew Sinkman

Matthew J. Sinkman is an associate in Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt’s Litigation & Dispute Resolution Practice.  His focus is on complex commercial litigation and other areas of dispute resolution. Matthew can be reached at 212-702-3144 or at sinkman@thsh.com.

Comments

InsideScoop Daily eNewsletter

InsideScoop delivers the latest-breaking news affecting in-house counsel. Get the latest business trends, current corporate litigation, labor developments, technology initiatives and more — FREE. Sign up now!

You have been subscribed! You will receive a confirmation email soon.

See the entire list of InsideCounsel eNewsletters.

Resource Library


Reduce eDiscovery Costs and Risks through Email Disposition

Read this white paper to learn best practices on determining email retention periods with real...

Prepare for the Eventuality of eDiscovery Now and Reap the...

This report presents an overview of eDiscovery implementation challenges organizations may face as well as...

The Fastest and Most Cost-Effective Document Review Available!

Recommind's Predictive Coding is the market's only solution that allows clients the option of reviewing...

Bring the Benefits of Decision Tree Analysis to Your Everyday...

In this on-demand webinar, learn how to counter the challenges of litigation with predictive analytics...

13 Things to do Now to Reduce Risk and Avoid...

We have developed best practices for lowering your e-Discovery costs, shortening the length of your...

7 Simple Strategies for Improving Legal Fee Budgeting Certainty

Understanding the legal fee budgeting paradigm and following seven simple strategies will help you control...

Complimentary White Paper: Best Practices for Meeting Critical eDiscovery Challenges

Packed with practical advice, this white paper discusses best practices for meeting eDiscovery challenges across...

Complimentary White Paper "Key Considerations for Collection Methodologies and Resources"

This white paper addresses the need for companies to reevaluate their current collection policies in...

Moving Matters In-House: How Technology Enables Legal In-Sourcing

Strategically shifting more matters to in-house counsel has proven to be an effective strategy to...

5 Ways to Promote Responsible Content Sharing

Find out five ways that organizations can promote responsible sharing of content among employees by...

View All »

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.