A Records Retention Policy in the Electronic Era
Every company should have a records retention policy. Due to increased use of e-mail, this policy must address the changing business world by including a clear directive on the retention and destruction of electronic records. (Companies tend to use the term "document retention policy." However, due to the proliferation of e-mail and other electronic data, "records retention policy" is more appropriate.) Most importantly, the policy must provide a directive that ensures that, when the threat of litigation arises, whether civil or criminal, all relevant documents are preserved.
Hotline
Recent developments of interest to corporate counsel.
Are You COBRA-Ready?
Early last year, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published proposed regulations updating the notice and disclosure requirements applicable to health care continuation coverage under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA). These proposed regulations update model notices, give disclosure guidance, and establish two new required COBRA notices. The proposed regulations were originally effective for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2004. However, in September, the DOL announced a delayed effective date in order to allow employers and plan administrators time to comply with the new requirements. The effective date is now 6 months after the DOL's adoption of the final rules to implement the administrative changes required by the new rules. The DOL expects to issue final rules in early 2004.
The Early Warning Signals of a Potential Media Crisis
Sixty-two percent of Americans equate "no comment" with "we're guilty", and the numbers have only gone up since Enron. A legal media strategy based on "no comment" is increasingly likely to lead to danger. An increasingly sensitive legal profession is confronting the same challenge on an almost daily basis: "I understand I need to be more vigilant about helping my client, and my own firm, navigate the landmines of high-profile cases. I know I need the skills to work with media professionals once the case goes public, but is there anything I can do before a problem gets dumped on my lap? How do I recognize the early warning signs of a potential crisis now, not when the reporters start calling?"
Demonstrating the True Burden of e-Evidence
Approximately 3 years ago in <i>Danis v. USN Communications</i>, Magistrate Judge Schenkier stated: "At some point, a party and/or its attorneys must be held responsible for knowing what documents are discoverable and where to find them." He prefaced this statement by reasoning that we cannot create a loophole in the discovery rules by allowing counsel to argue: "Judge, we just didn't know those tapes existed." <BR>Case law in the past 3 years, most notably in <i>Zubulake v. UBS Warburg</i>, decision, has expanded a corporate counselor's Danis duty to "know thy e-data." <i>See also Zubulake v. UBS Warburg</i>. Counsel representing today's 21st century companies need to know more than simply where electronic evidence resides; they also have a duty to know if that data is accessible (<i>ie</i>, how easily it can be restored and produced) and how much the whole process is going to cost.
New In-House Counsel Duties Under SAS 99
In its continuing effort to respond to high profile fraudulent financial reporting and to strengthen safeguards against fraud and the misappropriation of funds, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) has issued Statement on Auditing Standards 99: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement. Generally known as SAS 99, the new standard imposes additional requirements on the audit process and applies to audits of 2003 financial statements for both public and private companies. As in-house corporate counsel, you can be affected by this new measure in several ways, most notably in the information you may be required to gather and the questions you may be expected to answer. In addition, certain information gathered under SAS 99 can help public companies meet requirements imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Hotline
Recent developments of interest to corporate counsel.
Allocating Administrative Costs: What Your Benefits Adminstrator Needs To Know
The Employee Benefit Security Administration of the Department of Labor (DOL) has recently announced a more liberal view toward charging tax-qualified retirement plan expenses against the accounts of participants in 401(k), ESOP, and other defined contribution plans. This article provides a brief overview of the kinds of expenses that plans may pay and then explains how the new DOL guidance provides employers and plan sponsors with greater flexibility in allocating these expenses to participant accounts.
A Look Back and A Look Forward
Four months ago when I was asked to become Editor-in-Chief of <i>Marketing The Law Firm</i>, I never imagined that I would have the opportunity to engage a wonderful group of authors; select an outstanding Board of Editors; and moderate the first of what I hope will be many exciting and interesting Web audio seminars. As I look back on the last four months, I think the one thing that stands out in my mind is the fact that we had so many wonderful contributors to the newsletter. So I thought that we might take a look at the last 4 months and some of the highlights. Although I would love to be able to select all of the articles we've published, given the constraints of space, I am only able to pick two from each issue to feature. In case you missed reading these issues, we'll give you a nutshell version of these articles. I would also be remiss if I didn't say how much I appreciated the efforts of Russ Lawson and Mike O'Horo, whose monthly columns provided all of us with a look at the intricacies of marketing both in a law firm setting and to smaller firms and solos. And as we look forward, we'll take a look at what's coming up and a preview of our editorial calendar.
