Category: Litigation

Bankruptcy Courts See Social Media Accounts as Property

Small to mid-size business owners put their heart and soul into their companies, often times using social media to promote and talk about their business. What happens when an owner sells the business, or worse, goes bankrupt? What happens to the social media accounts?

 

Very recently, a gentleman found out. He owned a gun shop and recently filed bankruptcy. He was ordered to hand over the passwords to his social media accounts to the new owners, which he refused to do and spent some time in jail while this played out in court. In the end, he was forced to hand over the information, as the court determined that social media accounts are considered company property.

 

While this is a ground breaking decision, it is especially relevant for small to mid-size business owners, as their life is their business, and sometimes personal accounts become business accounts unintentionally. What did it in this particular case was the fact that the gentleman’s Facebook account not only shared his personal views, but promote the business. From a recent article on the subject:

 

“But Bohm ruled in April that the gun store’s social media accounts were not personal but used to boost sales, citing a tweet in which Alcede told his followers he was at a gun trade show as an example of something that would attract customers because it showed him as a “connected insider in the gun-buying community.”

 

What is the lesson to be learned? If you’re a business owner, it’s wise to create separate social accounts that are strictly for business purposes – promoting the business, engaging with customers, etc. – while keeping your personal accounts free of similar content to make sure there is a clear differentiation between the two types of accounts. Now is a good time to review your social accounts to make sure they fall in line with what constitutes a business page vs a personal account, and if needed, create separate accounts for your business. This is time well spent and can save you in the long run.

 

 

Why Social Media Makes a Difference in Jury Selection

The jury selection process is an art in some ways. There is limited time to get a full perception of potential jurors – who will serve as the “best” juror for the trial and who may be a detriment to your case. An article I came across from the Orange County Litigation News publication talks about the nuances of jury selection and what clues to look for when selecting a jury. Some of the highlights include:

 

    • Jury consultants find that the following types of potential jurors favor the plaintiff: long term unemployed individuals, those holding service oriented jobs, union workers, those who work in government jobs, and those with no prior jury experience.

 

    • Consultants also find that the following types of potential jurors favor the defendant: the elderly/retired, doctors, engineers, those in technical positions, and those with prior jury experience.

 

    • Uncovering adverse bias is an extremely important part of selecting a jury; this can be the most difficult to uncover within a limited time frame or depending on the tone of voir dire.

 

    • As many as 30% of the potential jury pool is considered “silent” – these are the potential jurors that are most quiet, are not outspoken, and are most often overlooked during the selection process. Research indicates that up to 20% of the “silent types” have an adverse bias that is not uncovered during the selection process, which can impact the overall outcome of the trial.

 

Considering the above, it’s a lot to take in and try to uncover during what can be, at times, a very short span of time. This is where advanced social media monitoring can come into play. Of course, this is most helpful when potential juror lists are provided in advance, which does not happen all the time. However, when it does, it can give further insight into potential jurors quickly, giving you a head start on exclusions or topics for further discussion.

With just some basic information on a potential juror, social media monitoring can shed insight on:

  • Employment/family history based on social content
  • Any preconceived prejudices, perceptions etc based on social media/online activity
  • Social connections that may influence perception/juror performance
  • Knowledge of trial/issues related to the trial

 

By employing a social media program prior to juror selection, a lot of the legwork can be done in advance and in very little time, allowing for the most efficient use of time as possible in selecting jurors for an upcoming trial.

 

 

Social Media For Jury Selection

During the jury selection process, there’s not a lot of time to determine which potential jurors would be best for your upcoming trial. Some states allow firms to receive a list of potential jurors prior to voir dire – wphen this happens, using social media research can truly prepare lawyers for the process and give them insight to make the most of their time in evaluating potential jurors.

Social media research is invaluable in this respect; by utilizing a social monitoring service, lawyers can easily look to social media conversations to learn more about a potential juror’s prejudices, connections, and knowledge of the trial details. As people have become more inclined to share their thoughts on social sites, this unstructured public data has become useful for more than simply generalized research.

Of course, any social media monitoring program can only capture public facing content; that is, if a user’s Facebook page is only set to show content to “friends”, then what they post will not be able to be collected. However, when people participate in open message boards and forums, respond to blog posts, or have their privacy settings to “public” then gaining insight into their social activities can be effective.

How is this done? A strong social media monitoring program uses a suite of software platforms to provide the most thorough, comprehensive social scan possible. When provided with basic information about potential jurors, social media monitoring scans are set and the following data is collected:

1. A listing of all public facing social sites a potential juror owns

2. A collection of content posted in a public facing social setting over a two-year period; in some cases, accounts that were public and deleted can be picked up when social monitoring tools provide archiving capabilities

3. Alert notification when items are found that may indicate a specific prejudice, connection to a defendant, law enforcement, or plaintiff in the case

Of course, not everyone has a social media footprint, and many are careful with their privacy settings. There are also times in which a person simply won’t have any social content readily available. However, when something significant is uncovered, the importance of using social media data as part of the jury selection process becomes clear.