Search Site
Menu
NJ Appellate Division Addresses Spoliation of Evidence in Recent Decision

Recently, the New Jersey Appellate Division in Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, et al. v. Viking Industrial Security, et al. addressed the issue of spoliation.

The case involved a workers compensation insurance fraud. Coverage premiums are based upon payroll, and for several years Viking reported payroll numbers far below what they actually were to their carrier, which resulted in their =paying a substantially lower premium than they should have. Viking kept two different sets of payroll records, and was paying premiums based upon the smaller of the two. During the discovery phase of the subsequent trial, Liberty Mutual requested Viking’s accounting records, kept on the QuickBooks computer program, and the Court ordered Viking to turn them over. The CD that Viking turned over to Liberty Mutual would not open, and the second CD from Viking was missing records. It was not until almost a year after requesting the records that Liberty Mutual actually received them.

Based on the delay caused by Viking’s failure to turn over the records, Liberty Mutual sought a spoliation order from the court. Viking argued that no spoliation had occurred and that, regardless of the delay, Liberty was now in possession of the records. Viking maintained that no evidence existed to show that the records were altered or destroyed, or that Liberty Mutual suffered any prejudice as a result. The trial court agreed with Liberty and issued the spoliation order, which imposed significant discovery sanctions on Viking and ultimately led to judgment being rendered against Viking.

On appeal, the Appellate Division found that the trial court had improperly issued the spoliation order based on Viking’s delay in turning over the computer records. “A Spoliation claim arises when a party in a civil action has hidden, destroyed, or lost relevant evidence and thereby impaired another party’s ability to prosecute or defend the action,” the court explained. The panel ultimately  held that, since the records were turned over to Liberty and they could not demonstrate that they were prejudiced by the delay, the spoliation order and corresponding sanctions were improper. The Appellate Division reversed and remanded the case.

The litigators at Lieberman Blecher & Sinkevich often face spoliation of evidence issues in environmental, toxic tort, insurance recovery and commercial litigation.  Record keeping protocols, evidence preservation and proper forms of notice become imperative in these matters. When litigation is anticipated, even remotely, routine consultation with counsel concerning the appropriate course of action could mean the difference between litigation success or failure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Our Attorneys

Recent Twitter Posts

  • New Jersey Legislature Passes National Precedent Setting Environmental Justice Bill. https://t.co/P8ybU2UrtD
    3 months ago
  • New Jersey files 12 new environmental justice lawsuits. https://t.co/jYo1yCwTOa
    3 months ago
  • Plans Underway for Building Offshore Wind Farms Along the New Jersey Coast. https://t.co/S4CDX5DMS0
    4 months ago
  • Energy companies cancel construction of Atlantic Coast Pipeline. https://t.co/aDYHr4nhal
    5 months ago

Recent Blog Posts

Lead Exposure and Frivolous Litigation

Owners of older residential properties are likely familiar with the legal requirement to provide warnings concerning the existence of lead. Lead exposure, particularly amongst children, can result in severe, even
Read More
Lead Exposure and Frivolous Litigation

New Jersey Supreme Court rules the PLA does not preempt CFA claims by consumers

Now more than ever, consumer protection is important. As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, we see new products on our shelves, promising safe disinfection for hands and surfaces as
Read More
New Jersey Supreme Court rules the PLA does not preempt CFA claims by consumers

Notices and Appellate Review of a CAFRA Permit

In JSTAR, LLC v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, et al., Docket No. A-1745-18T1, the Appellate Division in an unpublished decision revisited the issues of notice and a review
Read More
Notices and Appellate Review of a CAFRA Permit

Preemption Isn’t Always the Answer: The Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division highlights the necessary harmony between State legislation and municipal land use ordinances

On November 20, 2019, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division, issued an opinion in the matter captioned Lakeview Memorial Park Association v. Burlington County Construction Board
Read More
Preemption Isn’t Always the Answer: The Superior Court of New Jersey, Camden County Law Division highlights the necessary harmony between State legislation and municipal land use ordinances

In the media

  • Gulf Coast Town Center facing foreclosure

    Naples Daily News, September 16, 2015

    Wells Fargo filed a lawsuit Sept. 8 against an affiliate of CBL & Associates, the owners of the decadeold, 1.2 million-square-foot mall in south Fort Myers for a $190.9 million unpaid loan. The center has 94 stores on 204 acres, with such anchors as Super Target, Belk, Best Buy, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Marshalls and Costco...

    Read More
  • Town liable for private company's leaking underground tanks, court rules

    NJ.com Jul 26, 2017

    CRANFORD -- A couple that owned a businesses in town and became sick from leaking underground tanks owned by an adjacent business can sue the township for damages because the tanks were partially ...

    Read More
  • Dark Waters: How a Class Action Catapulted NJ to Forefront of 'Forever Chemicals' Battle

    NJ Law Journal Jan 09, 2020

    As property owners become increasingly aware of PFAS contamination, and as individuals exposed to PFAS learn of the health risks associated with exposure, liability will likely affect entire supply chains.

    Read More
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
Contact Our Firm

Quick Contact Form