Status Update: Facebook in the Courtroom

6.23.10    By admin    Tags

With social networking sites like Facebook (which has 350 million members) reaching unprecedented levels of popularity and use, social media seems to be everywhere. The courtroom is no exception. In Maryland, a Mayor challenged her misdemeanor embezzlement conviction after discovering that five jurors “friended” each other on Facebook during the trial. In Arkansas, a $12 million verdict was overturned because a juror used Twitter to update his followers during the trial. And in Florida, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee ruled that judges should “un-friend” attorneys who might appear before them in court, in order to avoid the appearance of impartiality.

When recently confronted with a social media issue in his own courtroom, Magistrate Judge Joe Brown of the Middle District of Tennessee took a position that can best be characterized as, “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.” In Barnes v. CUS Nashville, LLC, 2010 WL 2265668 (M.D. Tenn. Jun. 3, 2010), Judge Brown presided over a personal injury lawsuit brought by a patron of Coyote Ugly Saloon who injured herself while dancing on the Saloon’s bar. A prolonged discovery dispute developed between the parties over photographs of the incident taken by two non-party witnesses, which were subsequently posted on Facebook.

In order to expedite discovery regarding the photographs, their captions, and comments, Judge Brown volunteered to create a Facebook account and become “friends” with the witnesses for the sole purpose of reviewing the photographs and related comments in camera. The Judge’s offer presented a quick and creative solution to what had become a protracted discovery battle. The only catch — the witnesses would have to accept the Judge’s “friend” request in order for the plan to work.

Related content

  1. Status Update: Facebook in the Courtroom - Part II
  2. Discoverability of Secretly Recorded Conversations
  3. No Disguises in Videotaped Depositions

Comments