This week’s blog post for IPRO’s blog is about the laws and types of ESI associated with employment litigation. There are several laws to know and just about any type of ESI is “fair game”.
To understand employment litigation, it’s important to understand a few of the laws designed to prohibit discrimination around which employment disputes lead to litigation and one very important government agency responsible for enforcing those laws. Here are three of those laws:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): ADEA forbids age discrimination against people who are age 40 or older.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): Title I of the ADA prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities. Since July 26, 1994, Title I has applied to employers with 15 or more employees. Title V contains miscellaneous provisions which apply to EEOC’s enforcement of Title I.
What are some of the additional laws and agencies you need to know? Hint: one of them is the source of the three links directly above! And what are some examples of types of ESI that could be relevant in employment litigation (with links to cases where they were relevant, to boot!)? You can find out on IPRO’s blog here! Employment litigation cases are some of the most common with discovery disputes, so check it out! 🙂
So, what do you think? Has your organization dealt with employment litigation in the past? Many have! Please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic.
Disclosure: IPRO is an Educational Partner and sponsor of eDiscovery Today
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by my employer, my partners or my clients. eDiscovery Today is made available solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Today should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.
Excellent information as always, thanks Doug. One point I hear mentioned very occasionally but have missed seeing significant blog posts or commentary on (very likely my own oversights) regards the possibility that litigation discovery may in some cases override privacy considerations for potentially relevant document production.
I apologize if I’m being a bit vague here in my definition, but hopefully it is clear enough in asking to see informed commentary from experts including yourself directly related to that topic.
Regards,
Aaron Taylor