Spoliation of Evidence

Cases sink or swim based on the facts and evidence. Accordingly, it is paramount to ensure that you have a clear understanding of the facts, especially from the discovery process. There are circumstances, however, where a party to the case or a third party destroys evidence. Legally, this can result in severe evidentiary rulings.
Spoliation is the intentional destruction, mutilation or concealment of evidence. If a party has intentionally spoiled evidence — indicating fraud and a desire to suppress the truth — that party is subject to an adverse evidentiary inference. Baugher v. Gates Rubber Co., Inc., 863 S.W.2d 905, 907 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993). An adverse evidentiary inference is when a judge/jury can make the conclusion that the spoiled evidence was unfavorable to the spoiling party.
Less clear is whether an independent lawsuit for damages grounded in spoliation of evidence can be sustained. As of this writing, few jurisdictions have adopted a tort for spoliation of evidence and Missouri courts has yet to formally endorse such a claim.
Contact us with questions.

Related Articles

Premises Liability: Third-Party Criminal Acts

November 22, 2023

As a general rule, if a customer/invitee of a business is harmed by a third-party criminal act, the business is not responsible. The rationale for this rule is that criminal acts are rarely foreseeable. Early v. Dunn, 670 S.W.3d 47, 51 (Mo. App. E.D. 2023). There are a number of exceptions. First, a duty arises…

Read More

Mootness, Exceptions

October 19, 2023

Courts generally shy away from rendering decisions in moot cases. A case is moot when “the question presented for decision seeks a judgment upon some matter which, if the judgment was rendered, would not have any practical effect upon any then existing controversy.” DCM v. Pemiscot County Juvenile Office, 578 S.W.3d 776, 780 (Mo. 2019). There…

Read More

Comity, Multiple Lawsuits, Litigation

October 11, 2023

In complex situations, it is not uncommon for multiple lawsuits to be pending in multiple jurisdictions. When this occurs, one court, in the interests of comity, may allow the other court to handle the entire dispute. At the state level in Missouri, comity is not an ironclad rule, but a rule of “practice, convenience, and…

Read More

Contracts: General versus Specific Provisions

October 2, 2023

Parties are bound to the terms of the contract they sign, unless induced by fraud, duress, or undue influence. Lehman v. Automotive Investments, LLC, 608 S.W.3d 733, 738 (Mo. App. E.D. 2020). In analyzing contracts, courts focus on the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used. Id. Often times, however, a conflict can arise between what…

Read More
Scroll to Top