Litigation Hold Letters – Do I Need to Comply?

By Stark & Stark on June 3rd, 2011

Posted in Business & Commercial Law

So you’ve received a litigation hold letter demanding that you cease from destroying any evidence. One of the first questions that comes to mind is – “Do I need to comply?” Essentially, a litigation hold letter requests that the recipient (either an individual or company) cease from destroying any documents, both physical and electronic, that may be relevant to litigation. The litigation may be currently pending or the party may be threatening future action. Compliance with the letter depends upon whether you: (1) are a party to the pending litigation; (2) are a non-party to a pending litigation; or (3) anticipate being made a party to a lawsuit.

 

If you are a party to a pending litigation, you must comply with the request in order to prevent the destruction of any documents that could be relevant to the pending litigation. Failure to comply with the litigation hold letter may lead to sanctions. See F.R.C.P. 37(b).

 

Generally, if you are not a party to a pending litigation, then there is no duty to preserve the evidence. Conversely, one would have a duty to preserve the evidence if they anticipated being made a party to a lawsuit. In re NTL Sec. Litig., 244 F.R.D. 179, 194 (S.D.N.Y. 2007). A party or anticipated party must retain all relevant documents in existence at the time the duty to preserve attaches, and any relevant documents created thereafter. Id. at 194. The obligation to preserve evidence arises when the party has “noticed that the evidence is relevant to litigation – most commonly when suit has already been filed” or when a party should have known that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation. Orbit One Commc’n, Inc. v. Numerex Corp., 271 F.R.D. 429, 436 (S.D.N.Y. 2010). Thus, if a party anticipates litigation, then the duty to preserve evidence relevant to the litigation attaches. Accordingly, once litigation is filed, a party in the action who destroyed evidence prior to the issuance of a discovery order may still be sanctioned by the court. See F.R.C.P. 37(b).

 

In order to determine whether you should comply with a litigation hold letter, it is advised that you consult with an attorney to formulate the necessary response.

Multiple locations to better serve your needs—

Hamilton, NJ

100 American Metro Boulevard
Hamilton, NJ 08619
Phone: 609.896.9060
Secondary phone: 800.535.3425
Fax: 609.896.0629
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer

Philadelphia, PA

One Liberty Place, 1650 Market St., Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: 267.907.9600
Secondary phone: 800.535.3425
Fax: 215.564.6245
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer

Marlton, NJ

40 Lake Center, 401 NJ-73, Suite 130
Marlton, NJ 08053
Phone: 856.874.4443
Secondary phone: 888.241.7424
Fax: 856.874.0133
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer

Yardley, PA

777 Township Line Road, Suite 120
Yardley, PA 19067
Phone: 267.907.9600
Fax: 267.907.9659
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer

New York, NY

5 Pennsylvania Plaza 23rd Floor
New York, NY 10001
Phone: 800.535.3425
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer

Bridgeton, NJ

78 W Broad St
Bridgeton, NJ 08302
Phone: 856.874.4443
county best pa pennsylvania reviews south jersey berks northhampton montgomery bucks lehigh valley gloucester burlington mercer