Griffith Services Drilling, LLC v. Arrow Gas & Oil, Inc.
2014 Tenn. App. LEXIS 300
Tenn. Ct. App.2014Background
- Griffith Services Drilling, LLC and Lexington Insurance sued Arrow Gas & Oil for property damage from a fire at Griffith’s drilling site in Anderson County, TN.
- Arrow answered and counterclaimed for breach of contract based on Griffith’s nonpayment for fuel delivered the day of the fire.
- The trial court granted Arrow sanctions for spoliation by Griffith, dismissing Griffith’s claims.
- Arrow later moved for summary judgment on its counterclaim; the trial court granted summary judgment in part.
- The Tennessee Court of Appeals vacated the spoliation dismissal and the Arrow summary judgment, reinstating Griffith’s claims and remanding for further proceedings.
- Fire occurred June 10, 2008; Griffith cleaned the site and Arrow disposed of a malfunctioning nozzle; notice of intent to claim against Arrow was mailed July 21, 2008; evidence was destroyed or discarded by both sides.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether spoliation dismissal was an appropriate sanction. | Griffith argues spoliation warrants sanctions but not dismissal since both sides destroyed evidence. | Arrow contends dismissal was proper due to Griffith’s destruction of evidence and prejudice to Arrow. | No; dismissal was too severe because both sides spoliated and were disadvantaged. |
| Whether Arrow was entitled to summary judgment on its counterclaim. | Griffith asserts summary judgment was improper given unresolved issues about causation and ignition. | Arrow seeks payment for fuel plus service/fees, relying on established records. | Summary judgment vacated because spoliation sanction was vacated and case position changed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lyle v. Exxon Corp., 746 S.W.2d 694 (Tenn. 1988) (abuse of discretion standard for sanctions; discretion in discovery rulings)
- Overstreet v. Shoney’s, Inc., 4 S.W.3d 694 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999) (sanctions depend on circumstances; evidentiary destruction factors)
- White v. Vanderbilt University, 21 S.W.3d 215 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999) (appellate deference to trial court’s sanctions decisions)