Scenario:
Slatestone Land Development contracted Acer Tree Service to clear land for construction of several homes. The home is located on a bluff with a tree obstructed view of a lake. The tree service cut several trees that were on a private landowners property that were obstructing the lake view for the new homes. The private landowner is upset because she now has a fish bowl effect where the new homes are looking at her house whereas before the tree cutting episode her home was secluded.
The developer claims he didnt authorize the tree cutting. The new home owners claim that they didnt request the trees to be cut. Acer Tree Service claims that they were instructed cut all the trees that were marked with red spray paint. Slatestone and Acer have worked in the past, and marking trees with red spray paint is standard practice in the industry. All 18 trees were clearly marked with red paint, though no one from Slatestone was on site to supervise, and Slatestone claims they did not mark the 18 trees that were mistakenly cut.
The private landowner has decided to file a lawsuit for criminal trespass and destruction of property against Slatestone, Acer, and the owners of the new homes for the 18 mature maple trees that were cut. The law firm representing the private landowner has successfully argued for electronic discovery of the phones and computer for the home owners, Slatestone, and Acer in order to establish fault and liability. You have been hired to perform the digital forensic examination. The court order stipulates that only email and text messages from one month prior to the incident to the present time may be retrieved. Further stipulations include that the forensic report must first be provided to opposing counsel and is subject to objection. Additionally, the court order indicates that if you disclose information to the private landowner or her legal representative that you could be subject to civil and criminal prosecution. You have ten days to schedule your evidence collection and submit your reports to opposing counsel.
0 comments:
Post a Comment