Taylor v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
3:09-cv-00123
S.D. Ill.Dec 27, 2010Background
- Plaintiff Taylor sues UP under FELA and LIA, alleging sulfuric acid fumes exposure from defective, overheating batteries on UP 9315 on Dec 28, 2007, causing pulmonary disease and disability.
- Trial is set for Jan 3, 2011 to resolve liability in the case.
- UP moved in limine to exclude evidence about the destruction of UP 9315’s batteries on Dec 28, 2007.
- Batteries were scrapped after being sent to a repair facility (GNB) prior to this litigation.
- Goad, UP’s expert toxicologist, performed tests using new batteries to estimate fumes, not the actual Dec 28, 2007 batteries; his methodology is disputed.
- Court denies UP’s motion to exclude the destruction evidence, ruling it may be admissible and that spoliation considerations may arise depending on trial proof.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of destruction evidence | Taylor argues destruction is relevant and admissible to impeach Goad’s testing. | UP contends destruction is not relevant or clearly inadmissible until trial context. | Evidence not clearly inadmissible; may be admissible |
| Validity of Goad testing given battery condition | Tests used new batteries; actual Dec 28, 2007 batteries differed and could affect fumes. | Goad’s methodology is still probative to estimate exposure levels. | Jury should consider whether damaged batteries would alter fumes; not excluded |
| Spoliation instruction possibility | Destruction could warrant an adverse spoliation inference if proven intentional. | Defendant may not have acted in bad faith; inference not automatic. | Cannot rule out spoliation inference; remains a potential issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Coates v. Johnson & Johnson, 756 F.2d 524 (7th Cir. 1985) (destruction of evidence and inferences)
- Miksis v. Howard, 106 F.3d 754 (7th Cir. 1997) (adverse inference for spoliation requires bad faith or purposeful destruction)
- Spesco, Inc. v. General Elec. Co., 719 F.2d 233 (7th Cir. 1983) (spoliation and evidence destruction considerations)
- In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 287 F. Supp. 2d 938 (S.D. Ind. 2003) (context for admissibility and spoliation critiques)
- Schmid v. Milwaukee Elec. Tool Corp., 13 F.3d 76 (3d Cir. 1994) (evidence and trial considerations in tort cases)
- Vick v. Texas Employment Comm’n, 514 F.2d 734 (5th Cir. 1975) (limits on inference and spoliation evidence)