In a city FOIA class, a clerk asks a litigation-hold question that is beyond the trainer's expertise. What should the instructor do?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
A wrong legal answer from the front of the room is worse than naming the limit. Send the clerk to the law department instead of guessing. A FOIA class is the wrong place to invent litigation advice.
Full Explanation
Professional instructors acknowledge limits of expertise and route specialized questions to the right municipal authority rather than inventing answers. In a city FOIA class, a litigation-hold question beyond the trainer’s expertise must be acknowledged as outside scope and sent to the law department. Honest limit-plus-referral protects clerks from bad legal guidance and protects instructor credibility better than a confident guess.
Inventing a confident answer fails by concept: false certainty on litigation holds can mislead city staff on high-risk legal process. Telling the clerk the question is improper and must never be asked fails by punishing legitimate workplace inquiry. Guessing from a similar private-sector case in another city fails because another jurisdiction’s practice is not this city’s legal guidance.
Exam caveat: CTT+ repeatedly rewards “I will find out / refer to the owner” over bluffing. Legal and policy edge cases in municipal training are classic referral triggers.
Operational check: park the litigation-hold question on a visible parking lot; name the law-department contact or ticket path; follow up with the clerk after class; never close FOIA training with an invented hold rule.