Scott, D. v. Atlanta Restaurant Partners, 2237 EDA 2015

On Oct. 12, 2012 Diane Scott (appellant) tripped on a rug in the entrance of a T.G.I. Friday’s restaurant and alleged reinjury to a recently healed leg; she sued the restaurant (appellee) for negligence.
The restaurant had surveillance video covering the entrance that was overwritten after ~7–9 days; the relevant footage was not preserved and could not be produced at trial.
Appellant moved for spoliation sanctions; the trial court declined to enter judgment for plaintiff but imposed an adverse inference that a defect existed because appellee failed to preserve the video.
The trial court conducted a non-jury bench trial, found appellee lacked actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition (crediting restaurant employees’ testimony that no defect was observed), and entered judgment for appellee.
Appellant appealed, arguing (1) the trial court should have entered judgment for her as a sanction for spoliation, (2) the adverse inference plus other evidence entitled her to judgment as a matter of law, and (3) the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by refusing to enter judgment as a spoliation sanction	Appellant: appellee flagrantly destroyed relevant surveillance video and severe sanction (judgment) was warranted	Appellee: preservation burden limited; deletion was routine/innocent and summary judgment is unduly harsh	Court: no abuse of discretion — adverse inference appropriate, summary judgment too severe
Whether adverse inference + record required judgment as a matter of law for plaintiff	Appellant: combined inference plus testimony (including appellee’s witnesses) proves defect and notice	Appellee: testimony supports lack of defect/notice; credibility/weight are for factfinder	Court: viewing evidence for appellee, reasonable minds could differ; JNOV denied
Whether judgment was against weight of the evidence	Appellant: trial court improperly credited appellee’s witnesses and verdict shocks justice	Appellee: court reasonably credited employees who inspected mat every ~15 minutes and saw no defect	Court: no shock to sense of justice; credibility determinations stand; no new trial

Mount Olivet Tabernacle Church v. Edwin L. Wiegand Div., 781 A.2d 1263 (Pa. Super. 2001) (articulates multi-factor test for spoliation sanctions)
Creazzo v. Medtronic, Inc., 903 A.2d 24 (Pa. Super. 2006) (discusses adverse inference and spoliation remedies)
Tenaglia v. Proctor & Gamble, Inc., 737 A.2d 306 (Pa. Super. 1999) (summary judgment is an extreme spoliation sanction for rare cases)
Parr v. Ford Motor Co., 109 A.3d 682 (Pa. Super. 2014) (upheld permissive adverse inference where destruction prejudiced opposing party but summary judgment was not required)
Schroeder v. Commonwealth, Dep’t of Transp., 710 A.2d 23 (Pa. 1998) (recognizes jury may draw adverse inference from destroyed evidence)
Neve v. Insalaco’s, 771 A.2d 786 (Pa. Super. 2001) (constructive notice analysis for defective conditions)