The Social Media Law Blog is a forum for lawyers, compliance personnel, human resources managers, and other professionals who are struggling with the legal implications of social media across a broad variety of topics. Working professionals and Bloomberg BNA editors may share ideas, raise issues, and network with colleagues to build a community of knowledge on this rapidly evolving topic. The ideas presented here are those of individuals, and Bloomberg BNA bears no responsibility for the appropriateness or accuracy of the communications between group members.
Thursday, July 26, 2012
by Michael Loatman
Taco Bell wanted to argue that a plaintiff's consumer protection lawsuit was "an utter contrivance that is the classic example of a lawyer-driven strike suit." To illustrate, the fast food company asked the court to take judicial notice of the plaintiff's LinkedIn profile page showing he was a paid extern at a law firm.
The court refused.
Under Fed. R. Evid. 201, a court may take judicial notice of facts that are (1) generally known within its territorial jurisdiction or (2) capable of determination through sources "whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned."
Taco Bell, the defendant in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act case, thought a LinkedIn profile page would serve as a reliable source. However, the court concluded that LinkedIn's accuracy could reasonably be questioned.
Thus, the ruling in Ibey v. Taco Bell Corp., S.D. Cal., No. 3:12-cv-00583-H-WVG, 6/18/12, joins recent legal developments that question the accuracy of data on social media platforms, such as when a judge refused to allow service of process through Facebook because it could not confirm a Facebook account really was operated by the defendant.
Copyright 2012, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
You must Sign In or Register to post a comment.
Service of Process via Social Media Becoming a Reality?
Update in Federal Video Privacy Law Prompts Launch of “Netflix Social”
CISPA: Will Social Media Companies Come on Board?
Legislative Roundup