Finally, the court should determine whether the document retention policy was instituted in bad faith. In cases where a document retention policy is instituted in order to limit damaging evidence available to potential plaintiffs, it may be proper to give an instruction .... Similarly, even if the court finds the policy to be reasonable given the nature of the documents subject to the policy, the court may find that under the particular circumstances certain documents should have been retained notwithstanding the policy. For example, if the corporation knew or should have known that the documents would become material at some point in the future then such documents should have been preserved. Thus, a corporation cannot blindly destroy documents and expect to be shielded by a seemingly innocuous document retention policy.
To what extent does the ICANN UDPR comply with the ABA's Draft Best Practices? To what extent does the Michigan proposal comply with the ABA's Draft Best Practices? Consider the purpose of proposed Amended Rule 8.115 of the Michigan Rules of Court:
Courtroom Decorum
(A) Display of Flags. The flags of the United States and of the State of Michigan must be displayed in a conspicuous place adjacent to the bench at all times and be visible at some point during the transmission of an Internet broadcast of the Cyber Court when court is in session.Comments on the ABA Draft are due May 31, 2002. What suggestions for improvement would you make?
To Part
1
To Part
2
To Part
3
To Part
4
To Syllabus
Index
To Class
Policies