3 ms·
"Not protected from disclosure to law enforcement" is still better than "entered into the public record by default" as a result of being offered as evidence in
by i_am_jl 3y ago
"Not protected from disclosure to law enforcement" is still better than "entered into the public record by default" as a result of being offered as evidence in a civil trial.
- chrisweekly 3y agoAll the more so because law enforcement agents would require cause (warrant? subpoena? IANAL) to obtain the records, right?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> law enforcement agents would require cause (warrant? subpoena? IANAL) to obtain the records, right? No. If I took you to arbitration and think you acted illegally, I can send the case documents to law enforcement. Most people don't do this, because it's a hassle. But if you pissed me off or were morally offensive, hell yes I'm doing it. After that, yes, they need to execute searches to follow up on the information.
- beachy 3y ago> If I took you to arbitration and think you acted illegally, I can send the case documents to law enforcement. Only if the terms of arbitration allow you to share said documents.
- vkou 3y agoThere aren't any terms of arbitration that can prevent you from sharing evidence of a criminal conspiracy with the police. An NDA cannot stop you from reporting criminal conduct. You can be sued by the criminal for doing so, but this is America, you can be sued for anything by anyone. It doesn't mean that they'll win (And will look a hell of a lot like witness intimidation in their criminal trial.)