Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

RECORD RETENTION POLICIES AND TEXT MESSAGING

Written on .

It should be no surprise to employers that issues are now arising concerning text messages that are similar if not identical to issues over the last few years pertaining to retention of emails.  In significant litigation, each side seeks to gain access to emails of the other parties that might assist their position in the case.  Legal rules require employers to retain documentary evidence, which could include text messages as well as emails, at the point the employer reasonably should have known that the evidence may be relevant to anticipated litigation.  An employer that fails to retain such evidence is not only potentially subject to the assessment of fines or attorneys’ fees and costs, but conceivably might be subject to an adverse inference known as "spoilation," in which the other party either wins the case subject to a favorable inference that the lost evidence would have benefitted the opposite party.  The destruction of evidence in certain circumstances can in theory determine the outcome of a case.  

For many years, employers struggled with the use of emails and the business practice essentially developed that it would be impractical to prohibit emails, but that certain record retention policies were necessary.  The same situation applies today to the use of text messaging.  In theory, similar if not identical legal rules for text messages apply as did previously with emails.

There are various approaches employers can take to using and preserving text messages.  These approaches range from prohibiting their use, methods of providing copies, or using employer-provided equipment.  There may be technical solutions to these issues, but in some of them, it is still up to each individual employee to comply with the employer’s policies.

Related Content

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

Palmyra, Syria
On Thursday, June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts cannot review any determination of the Secretary of Homeland Securi…
thermometer
Although there is no federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) heat rule, OSHA still issues heat citations under its Gen…
Marijuana
On April 23, 2026, a final Order was issued reclassifying FDA-approved medications that contain marijuana authorized pursuant to a state an…
white house lawn
There has been a lot of confusion about the 2026 filing of EEO-1 reports, also known as Standard Form 100.  According to a notice of an EEO…
ai robot, table
In last month’s newsletter, we discussed a federal case from New York which held that an individual’s artificial intelligence-generated doc…
ai visualization
Employers are struggling with how to handle trans-sexual employees who choose to use the bathroom of their gender choice, rather than their…