07.02.2014 Views

MLJ Volume 36-1.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

MLJ Volume 36-1.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

MLJ Volume 36-1.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Social Incrimination 267<br />

oversight if they did not feel the disclosure was forthright or contained all<br />

relevant material. 203 The judge found two possible ways to infer whether<br />

hidden material may exist. First, the court could consider account specific<br />

information such as public pr<strong>of</strong>ile pictures and privacy settings. 204<br />

Additionally, the court could:<br />

infer from the social networking purpose <strong>of</strong> Facebook, and the applications it<br />

<strong>of</strong>fers to users such as the posting <strong>of</strong> photographs, that users intend to take<br />

advantage <strong>of</strong> Facebook's applications to make personal information available to<br />

others. 205<br />

Not all claims result in the same inferences. In Schuster v Royal & Sun<br />

Alliance, 206 the court declined a discovery request based on the mere<br />

existence <strong>of</strong> a plaintiff’s Facebook account because no relevant material<br />

existed on the publicly listed pr<strong>of</strong>ile.<br />

In both Canada and the US, courts have exercised their discretion in a<br />

variety <strong>of</strong> ways. In some cases, the judge has sanctioned failure to disclose<br />

relevant material by forcing unfettered production <strong>of</strong> an entire account. In<br />

Bass v Miss Porter’s School, 207 a Connecticut court presided over a case in<br />

which the plaintiff claimed intentional infliction <strong>of</strong> emotional distress<br />

after being expelled from school. After the defendant complained that the<br />

plaintiff was not disclosing all posts related to their emotional state <strong>of</strong><br />

mind following the expulsion, the judge undertook a sample comparison<br />

between the plaintiff’s entire Facebook account and what information had<br />

been disclosed. The court ordered the plaintiffs to hand over the entire<br />

contents <strong>of</strong> their account to the defendants after finding their voluntary<br />

disclosure to be insufficient. In Frangione v Vandongen, 208 an Ontario<br />

master ordered a plaintiff who claimed he could only sit for 20 minutes at<br />

a time to turn over private communications such as messages and chat<br />

transcripts in addition to photographs and posts.<br />

Some states have extremely broad disclosure rules that require almost<br />

all material, even if only peripherally related to the case, be disclosed. 209 In<br />

203<br />

Ibid at para 13.<br />

204<br />

Ibid at para 21.<br />

205<br />

Ibid at para 31.<br />

206<br />

Schuster, supra note 169 at para 39.<br />

207<br />

Bass ex rel Bass v Miss Porter's School, 2009 WL 3724968 (D Conn).<br />

208<br />

Frangione, supra note 198.<br />

209<br />

See Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Rules <strong>of</strong> Civil Procedure, Pa RCP No at r 4003.1. This

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!