what do you know about subpoenas?

[AnyMal]

Originally posted by: edprush

Originally posted by: AnyMal

If you don't show up for a hearing, the judge will automatically rule in favor of the other party.

The subpoena is stating that all records related to a website be turned over to the Plaintiff by April 15.

So there isn't a hearing that I know of.

Sounds to me like there already was a hearing and since you weren't there judge already ruled. If you fail to comply with subpoena you may be held in contempt.

 

[theknight571]

Are you being sued? or is the Plaintiff looking to get your records in order to sue/press charges aginst someone else?

Personally... eitherway I'd at least consult with a lawyer.

 

[edprush]

Originally posted by: AnyMal


Sounds to me like there already was a hearing and since you weren't there judge already ruled. If you fail to comply with subpoena you may be held in contempt.

The information the plaintiff wants from me is to be used to prosecute another party, not me.

 

[edprush]

Originally posted by: theknight571
Are you being sued? or is the Plaintiff looking to get your records in order to sue/press charges aginst someone else?

Personally... eitherway I'd at least consult with a lawyer.

The latter. The plaintiff wants to sue the posters on my forum.

 

[theknight571]

I'd still consult a lawyer.

Once you release the information, I'd be worried about the defendant turning around and suing you for releasing the data.

It's a vicious circle.

 

[imported_bum]

Originally posted by: edprush

Originally posted by: theknight571
Are you being sued? or is the Plaintiff looking to get your records in order to sue/press charges aginst someone else?

Personally... eitherway I'd at least consult with a lawyer.

The latter. The plaintiff wants to sue the posters on my forum.

Eh, I'd contact a lawyer just to make sure, but if a court has delivered a subpoena I think I'd just comply with their request and stay out of the actual lawsuit. You might piss off somebody on your website, though .

And now you must tell us what the website is, or at least who's getting sued for what, or give us a link!

 

[edprush]

The website is just a small forum (for my hometown) where one user feels that some of the other users have talked 'derogatorily' towards the plaintiff.

 

[edprush]

Here is part of what the subpoena says, "provide contact information for any posters that have made nasty comments about plaintiff."

How the heck to I decide what is nasty? I know you said contact a lawyer but I just wondered what other lay-people consider "nasty."

They must allow subpoenas to be issued to anyone that wants one served.

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: edprush
Here is part of what the subpoena says, "provide contact information for any posters that have made nasty comments about plaintiff."

How the heck to I decide what is nasty?.

You can either comply with the subpoena, or challenge it in court in writing. First, contact your state bar association, get a referral, and contact a lawyer. My guess is you would challenge the subpoena on the basis that it's too vague and requires you to make a determination as to what is "nasty" and what is not. I'm no lawyer, but I'm guessing there's a lot of potential grounds for challenging. Then, after the court rules on the subpoena, you'll know more specifically what you need to provide.

Oh, and whatever you do, don't destroy or delete *any* records, it could land you in trouble. Keep any logs and records you have, but don't turn anything over to anyone until you've talked to a lawyer.

 

[NuroMancer]

Originally posted by: tagej

Originally posted by: edprush
Here is part of what the subpoena says, "provide contact information for any posters that have made nasty comments about plaintiff."

How the heck to I decide what is nasty?.

You can either comply with the subpoena, or challenge it in court in writing. First, contact your state bar association, get a referral, and contact a lawyer. My guess is you would challenge the subpoena on the basis that it's too vague and requires you to make a determination as to what is "nasty" and what is not. I'm no lawyer, but I'm guessing there's a lot of potential grounds for challenging. Then, after the court rules on the subpoena, you'll know more specifically what you need to provide.

Oh, and whatever you do, don't destroy or delete *any* records, it could land you in trouble. Keep any logs and records you have, but don't turn anything over to anyone until you've talked to a lawyer.

Agreed,

Contact a lawyer asap, honestly, if you don't, you could end up in alot of trouble by not understanding what you are supposed to do. The person that you turn over information on might decide to sue you. Get a lawyer.

Do you have a privacy policy on the website?

 

[Al Neri]

when i was a kid i would laugh when i heard that word.

 

[edprush]

Originally posted by: NuroMancer

Do you have a privacy policy on the website?

No.
I do believe the users are under the impression that there is an implicit policy to keep their identities private.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: edprush

Originally posted by: NuroMancer

Do you have a privacy policy on the website?

No.
I do believe the users are under the impression that there is an implicit policy to keep their identities private.

If you don't have it spelled out in EXPLICIT language (and perhaps legalese) you could have a real problem. Especting people to abide by an unwritten "IMPLIED" rule is just asking for trouble...

You'd be well advised to get a GOOD lawyer...(do you give your money to a lawyer, or to the people lining up to sue you?)

 

[Dyloot]

I doubt very much that the owner of a website has the ability to legally withhold the identity of his members. He can write as many privacy policies as he wants, the legal system won't respect them. As a journalist I can be jailed if I withhold sources in a criminal case (not so much in a civil) despite my first amendment rights.

The only exceptions that I'm aware of are the husband-wife, doctor-patient and lawyer-client rights, and even the doctor-patient has limitations. The husband-wife may also have major limitations. I know it exists, but my knowledge of it is probably majorly off thanks to Law & Order. =P

As a journalist, I can make one suggestion. I would consult a lawyer about your duty as a website moderator in regards to libel. If there is libel on your site, I believe the victim must notify you within a certain time period and that you have to then remove it and post a correction in order to avoid consequences. Now, I may be way off on this one... when I studied journalism in the late 90s internet libel was still developing. There may have been major cases since I took the law class that have changed how cyberspace libel works.