Social Media Posts: The New E-Discovery Battleground

Qandah v. St. Charles County (E.D. Mo. April 2, 2020) highlights what e-discovery professionals have long anticipated: social media is becoming a critical battleground in litigation. This case illustrates the challenges parties may face in agreeing on the scope, timing, and production of relevant social media data.

Overview

In this case involving alleged misconduct by a correctional officer against a prisoner, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant deleted relevant Facebook posts and sought spoliation sanctions.

To support the claim that the defendant intentionally allowed another prisoner to attack the plaintiff based on religious bias, the plaintiff requested Facebook posts that allegedly demonstrated this behavior. After four months of back-and-forth negotiations, the plaintiff still had not received the requested posts.

When the court granted the plaintiff’s motion to compel, the specific Facebook posts in question were missing. As a result, the plaintiff sought spoliation sanctions based on their deletion.

Ruling

• Motion Granted in Part.
  The court ordered the defendant to make the Facebook page reasonably available for inspection but declined to impose additional sanctions because the relevant posts were ultimately produced.
• No Bad Faith Shown.
  Although the plaintiff argued that delays and costs justified sanctions, the court found no evidence that the defendant acted in bad faith by withholding the information.
• Prejudice Recognized Based on Missing Evidence.
  The court acknowledged that the plaintiff was prejudiced by the temporary absence of the Facebook posts, particularly because the plaintiff knew of their existence and relevance.

Expert Opinion from David Cohen, Esq., Chair of E-Discovery Group, Reed Smith LLP

“The opinion reflects no clear justification for the defendant’s failure to produce all relevant Facebook posts. However, the defendant avoided sanctions likely because the posts were eventually recovered. The court could have reasonably awarded the plaintiff recovery of costs incurred in compelling production.”

Case Law Tip

Review FRCP guidelines to better understand the rules and requirements governing e-discovery practices.