
Court grants Chevron access to 9 years of email data of activists, critics [pdf] - bonchibuji
http://dg5vd3ocj3r4t.cloudfront.net/sites/default/files/documents/Kaplan-Order-Hotmail-IP-subpoena_0.pdf
======
thinkcomp
Welcome to the world of complex litigation, where cases take decades, span
continents, and make lawyers eight figures.

[http://www.plainsite.org/tags/index.html?id=701&complex=1](http://www.plainsite.org/tags/index.html?id=701&complex=1)

This particular case docket can be found here:

[http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2322215](http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2322215)

Stanford Law had a one-day conference devoted to this case, and I heard top
lawyers from both sides speak. I emerged disgusted by just about everyone.
There are no winners in this matter--except the lawyers.

------
zimbatm
If there is enough proof to grant them access to these records, why isn't a
prosecutor taking over the case ? Giving access to confidential data to the
adversarial party doesn't seem very wise.

~~~
rayiner
The bar for discovery in a civil litigation is far lower than the bar for
initiating a prosecution. And that's how it should be. If you are convinced
that Enron dumped toxic waste in your town on purpose, should you have to
prove your case to a point sufficient to initiate a prosecution before you're
allowed access to their e-mails? That wouldn't make any sense--the point of
discovery is to get all the potentially relevant facts on the table so they
can be sorted through.

Also, setting the bar that high for discovery wouldn't make any sense. To
initiate an arrest and criminal prosecution, you essentially have to have a
"more likely than not he did it" belief in the suspect's guilt. But the "more
likely than not" standard is all it takes to win a civil case. So by the time
you get enough evidence to initiate a criminal case, you have enough to win a
civil case.

~~~
zimbatm
Isn't there cases where the court would appointing a neutral party to do the
search ? I understand that the plaintiff wants to get access to all these
information but it seems unwise to allow them since they already are in a
conflictual situation. It gives them power to discover other things unrelated
to the case.

~~~
rayiner
Chevron isn't getting direct access to a big e-mail database. Plaintiffs'
lawyers will do the search and produce to Chevron only what's relevant, not
privileged, not confidential, etc.

~~~
thwest
Chevron doesn't have council in house?

~~~
rayiner
To be clear, I mean the counsel representing the activists will do the search
and give only relevant documents to Chevron. Since the activists are adverse
to Chevron, it wouldn't be appropriate for Chevron's counsel to go through the
emails themselves.

------
eli
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6090238](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6090238)

------
transfire
What Chevron/Texaco did to Ecuador makes the BP accident look like a pan of
bacon.

~~~
sadfaceunread
(Offtopic) Is this a common idiom? I've never heard pan of bacon as the end of
this kind of phrase before.

~~~
legutierr
I think he's talking about the grease left over after cooking it.

~~~
fnordfnordfnord
If you're from the south it doesn't have the same meaning.

related joke: [http://www.cartalk.com/content/tips-northerners-moving-
south](http://www.cartalk.com/content/tips-northerners-moving-south)

------
Spooky23
The title is both linkbait and inaccurate.

~~~
fatman
Yeah really. Chevron is getting names and IP's for accused
fraudsters/racketeers. Doesn't exact stir the same level of outrage as "the
data of activists".

~~~
Adam503
Wrong. Making a claim in a courtroom and telling truth has not got one thing
to do with each other.

Chevron has the unmitigated gall here to claim the $18.2 Billion settlement
against Chevron in Uruguay was the product of FRAUD. Chevron is claiming they
did nothing wrong in Uruguay and they should be allowed to look look through 9
years of e-mail of activists to get the chance to try to dig up something up

------
PhasmaFelis
Could someone summarize the highlights or link to an actual article? I don't
really have either the time or the training to glean the subtleties from 12
pages of legalese.

~~~
dylandrop
It may be 12 pages but it's really straightforward. Just read it myself.

------
ChrisAntaki
Interesting, I wonder if this will lead to boycotts of Chevron? It does appear
to be a pretty large human rights violation.

~~~
thwest
You generally can't boycott a particular producer of a commodity like oil.

~~~
ChrisAntaki
There are plenty of Chevron branded gas stations.

