{"id":24214,"date":"2015-04-06T12:58:11","date_gmt":"2015-04-06T16:58:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=24214"},"modified":"2015-04-06T12:59:04","modified_gmt":"2015-04-06T16:59:04","slug":"plaintiffs-save-your-emails","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=24214","title":{"rendered":"Plaintiffs, save your emails!!"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

Just in case you haven’t been reading Sidebar<\/strong> often and thus need to be reminded, here’s an abstract of a story from New York Law Journal that proves the point:<\/p>\n

Initial Emails Back Binding Agreement Claim, Panel Finds<\/em><\/h1>\n<\/div>\n

Ben Bedell<\/a>, New York Law Journal<\/small>

\n
\n

Three emails exchanged between a CEO and an employee was enough to support a claim that a binding employment agreement had been reached two months before the company cut ties with the employee, a split First Department panel ruled Thursday.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Just in case you haven’t been reading Sidebar often and thus need to be reminded, here’s an abstract of a story from New York Law Journal that proves the point: Initial Emails Back Binding Agreement Claim, Panel Finds Ben Bedell, … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[337],"tags":[816,581,149,686,794,60,436,310],"class_list":["post-24214","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-legal-news","tag-appeals-court-decision","tag-appellate-courts","tag-discovery-documents","tag-email-discovery-documents","tag-emails-as-evidence","tag-employment-lawsuits","tag-law-and-the-courts","tag-role-of-judges"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t