Federal Rule of Evidence 901 Requirement of Authentication or Identification (E-Discovery)

In e-discovery, so much attention is grabbed by what is and is not reasonably accessible, meeting schedules and deadlines, and motions to compel or resist being compelled, that one serious issue is largely ignored: ESI being used as evidence. Evidence has to be admissible. One requirement of admissibility is that the evidence is what it claims to be; that is, it must be authenticated.
Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm discussed admissibility of ESI as evidence in Lorraine v. Markel (2007), stating
“Considering the significant costs associated with discovery of ESI, it makes little sense to go to all the bother and expense to get electronic information only to have it excluded from evidence or rejected from consideration during summary judgment because the proponent cannot lay a sufficient foundation to get it admitted. The process is complicated by the fact that ESI comes in multiple evidentiary ‘flavors,’ including e-mail, Web site ESI, Internet postings, digital photographs, and computer-generated documents and data files.”
Under Federal Rule of Evidence 901, the authentication requirement needed for admissibility is met rather simply. ESI may be authenticated by testimony that a matter is what it is claimed to be. Whether the ESI evidence is authentic is a fact question for the jury to decide. Metadata may be used to authenticate an ESI.