Can you please delete thread?

[Anonymous]

It's in Jobs and Careers forum "miscarriages putting job at risk". I have attained an attorney and am pursuing a case so I just want to delete details from the web. Thanks!

[jsteele]

Okay, done.

[Anonymous]

As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

[Anonymous]

Also you can't "attain" at attorney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also you can't "attain" at attorney.

She probably meant retained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

this is pretty ridiculous. Jeff is not a party to any sort of existent/non-existent case, he has no obligation to retain anything. I haven't read the thread, but it couldn't be evidence- it's just the OP saying what happened. Signed- also a litigating attorney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

this is pretty ridiculous. Jeff is not a party to any sort of existent/non-existent case, he has no obligation to retain anything. I haven't read the thread, but it couldn't be evidence- it's just the OP saying what happened. Signed- also a litigating attorney.

Really? You're an attorney and you don't see how it could be evidence? NP here, also a litigator, and it clearly could be evidence. If the OP made a statement against interest that the other side found useful, hearsay exception right there. Clearly, other possibilities as well.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

this is pretty ridiculous. Jeff is not a party to any sort of existent/non-existent case, he has no obligation to retain anything. I haven't read the thread, but it couldn't be evidence- it's just the OP saying what happened. Signed- also a litigating attorney.

Really? You're an attorney and you don't see how it could be evidence? NP here, also a litigator, and it clearly could be evidence. If the OP made a statement against interest that the other side found useful, hearsay exception right there. Clearly, other possibilities as well.

The win goes to 13:24 -- while it could be evidence, Jeff has no obligation to preserve it. Sorry 13:26, please turn in your bar card.

[Anonymous]

I'm not a lawyer, but I have sense enough to know that nothing ever really "disappears" from the internet - whether legally "discoverable" or not. OP is bit naive on a lot of fronts.
SMH!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

this is pretty ridiculous. Jeff is not a party to any sort of existent/non-existent case, he has no obligation to retain anything. I haven't read the thread, but it couldn't be evidence- it's just the OP saying what happened. Signed- also a litigating attorney.

Really? You're an attorney and you don't see how it could be evidence? NP here, also a litigator, and it clearly could be evidence. If the OP made a statement against interest that the other side found useful, hearsay exception right there. Clearly, other possibilities as well.

Not a hearsay exception b/c it's not hearsay at all, statements of a party-opponent are direct evidence.

Clearly there's some little thing, no matter how tiny, that OP doesn't want coming out at trial. That's why she requested deletion. But it could cost her entire case. Spoliation is NOT a joke and jusges take it incredibly seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

this is pretty ridiculous. Jeff is not a party to any sort of existent/non-existent case, he has no obligation to retain anything. I haven't read the thread, but it couldn't be evidence- it's just the OP saying what happened. Signed- also a litigating attorney.

Really? You're an attorney and you don't see how it could be evidence? NP here, also a litigator, and it clearly could be evidence. If the OP made a statement against interest that the other side found useful, hearsay exception right there. Clearly, other possibilities as well.

The win goes to 13:24 -- while it could be evidence, Jeff has no obligation to preserve it. Sorry 13:26, please turn in your bar card.

He may have had no obligation to preserve it; that is different from responding to a request to "delete" it (ha!) where such request clearly and unambiguously contemplates its use in litigation.

[Anonymous]

He has no obligation to preserve this. He is not a party to the litigation, he has not received a subpoena, he does not work for the company, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As an attorney... it's still discoverable. Jeff, you'd better save it in case it gets subpoena'ed, you're now on notice that it's possible. OP, you'd better tell your lawyer about the thread's existence so your lawyer can figure out what steps, if any, to take. OP, you should also know that deliberately trashing evidence (ex: asking Jeff to delete a thread) can get your case deep-sixed real fast.

Careful Jeff, you just may have blood in your hands again. J/K bwhahaha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He has no obligation to preserve this. He is not a party to the litigation, he has not received a subpoena, he does not work for the company, etc.

So if OP hands you a letter and says, "Burn this for me in your fireplace because I'm going to be filing a lawsuit," you may do so, with impunity? I don't think so...