| a250656 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2025-11-24 |
Affirmed
|
Robert E. Villanueva v. Circle K Stores Inc.
|
|
… shion a jury instruction directing an adverse inference on Holiday’s purported spoliation of evidence. Our decision affirming summary judgment ends the possibility of a jury trial and renders moot any issue about jury instructions. He al …
|
| A18-0270 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2018-08-06 |
Reinstated
|
Gray v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety
|
|
… d the document while at the sheriff's office. 8 Gray next argues that under the spoliation doctrine, an adverse inference in his favor-that he never received notice-is required because the video recorder at the sheriff's office malfunctione …
|
| A17-0404 |
Minn. |
2017-11-08 |
Denied
|
Zornes v. State
|
|
… acts to support a claim of prosecutorial misconduct. He labels some assertions “spoliation,” but they are actually additional arguments that law enforcement officials did not sufficiently investigate the case. The postconviction court- dete …
|
| A16-390 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2017-01-09 |
Affirmed
|
Buckingham Trucking, Inc. v. Excel Manufacturing, Inc., and Excel Manufacturing, Inc., Th…
|
|
… L), and erred in failing to impose sanctions for respondent’s alleged evidence spoliation. We affirm. FACTS Appellant Excel Manufacturing, Inc., manufactures industrial recycling equi …
|
| A15-1864 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-08-15 |
Affirmed
|
Curtis Trude, (A15-0378), (A15-1863, A15-1864), Glenwood State Bank, counterclaimant, and…
|
|
… puter. The district court conducted a hearing to address Trude’s laptop spoliation and its ongoing failure to disclose the Ziegler equipment’s location. JBI and Trude claimed that JBI did not want to reveal the equipment’s locatio …
|
| A15-765 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-02-01 |
Affirmed
|
State of Minnesota v. Warren Fred Nelson
|
|
… salke, 801 N.W.2d 82, 111 (Minn. 2011) (stating that failure to file motion on spoliation of evidence fell “squarely within tactical decisions properly left to the discretion of trial counsel” (quotation omitted)). Nelson’s claim that he …
|
| A15-236 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-12-07 |
Affirmed
|
Sandra Williams v. Canterbury Inn Shakopee, LLC, d/b/a Americas Best Value Inn & Suites, …
|
|
… mary judgment dismissing their negligence claims and denying their request for spoliation sanctions, arguing that respondent breached its heightened duty of care to make its premises reasonably safe and that spoliation sanctions are warr …
|
| A15-173 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-10-05 |
Affirmed
|
Tiffany Montgomery, Relator v. AT & T Mobility Services, LLC, Department of Employment an…
|
|
… re the ULJ on remand to impose an adverse- inference sanction upon AT&T for its spoliation of the surveillance video. But relator’s spoliation claim is being raised for the first time on appeal and, therefore, the claim is not properly befo …
|
| A14-1117 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-03-23 |
Affirmed
|
Ryan James Dekok v. Commissioner of Public Safety
|
|
… ant asserts he requested an additional test or the officer’s response, under a spoliation-of-evidence theory. We affirm. FACTS On February 1, 2014, a deputy was traveling eastbound on Hig …
|
| No. A12-1944 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2013-07-22 |
Granted
|
Seagate Technology, LLC v. Western Digital Corp.
|
|
… took place, Seagate brought motions for sanctions based on respondents’ alleged spoliation and fabrication of evidence. At Western Digital’s urging, the arbitrator deferred consideration of the motions until after the arbitration hearing. A …
|
| Nos. A09-2212, A09-2213, A09-2214, A09-2215 |
Minn. |
2012-03-28 |
Remanded
|
Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp.
|
|
… ebruary 2008, in advance of trial, appellants sought sanctions against BNSF for spoliation of evidence, specifically, BNSF’s failure to preserve the original computer hard drive to which a BNSF employee downloaded data from the signal event …
|
| No. A09-0244 |
Minn. |
2011-08-03 |
Granted
|
Miller v. Lankow
|
|
… District Court excluded Miller’s expert witness evidence as a sanction for the spoliation of evidence that resulted from Miller starting to make repairs to his home. The court then granted respondents’ summary judgment motion on the basis …
|
| No. A09-1829 |
Minn. |
2011-07-13 |
Stayed
|
State v. Nissalke
|
|
… to *111 follow [Nissalke’s] wishes on many circumstances,” and failed to file a spoliation motion after discovering that the State had lost physical evidence. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the effective assistance of counsel. S …
|
| No. A10-232 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2010-12-14 |
Granted
|
Peterson v. 2004 Ford Crown Victoria Vin: 2FAHP74WX4X158445
|
|
… 6, 118 (Minn.1995) (quotations omitted) (excluding expert witness testimony for spoliation of evidence). This includes awarding attorney fees. Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp., 788 N.W.2d 770, 783 (Minn.App.2010), review grante …
|
| No. A09-2223 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2010-10-19 |
Denied
|
Willis v. Indiana Harbor Steamship Co.
|
|
… (2006). Appellants challenge (1) a negative-inference jury instruction based on spoliation; (2) the determination that the liability and apportionment of damages were governed by Minnesota law rather than federal maritime law; (3) the amoun …
|
| A09-2212, A09-2213, A09-2214, A09-2215 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2010-09-14 |
Denied
|
Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp.
|
|
… 0 against BNSF. The district *783 court awarded sanctions on three grounds: (1) spoliation, discovery, and evidentiary abuses; (2) misrepresentations and false testimony; and (3) witness abuses and obstructing law enforcement. 15 Specifical …
|
| A09-1617 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2010-04-13 |
Granted
|
MASTER BLASTER, INC. v. Dammann
|
|
… ne; and (4) Pipestone was procedurally disadvan *28 taged due to South Dakota’s spoliation rules. Though the practice of vouching has long been recognized in Minnesota, the relevant Minnesota caselaw — which is not recent — does not fully a …
|
| A09-244 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2009-12-22 |
Granted
|
Miller v. Lankow
|
|
… itted clear error in excluding evidence of the mold and moisture intrusion as a spoliation sanction for his repair of the home without sufficient notice to respondents because (1) respondents had notice of the mold and moisture intrusion an …
|
| A08-1556 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2009-06-23 |
Granted
|
Yath v. Fairview Clinics, N. P.
|
|
… everal of the district court’s decisions: (1) declining to impose sanctions for spoliation after one defendant deleted com *38 puter files allegedly to hide involvement in the Internet postings; (2) holding that the invasion-of-privacy clai …
|
| A07-0313 |
Minn. |
2009-05-14 |
Granted
|
Foss v. Kincade
|
|
… e that the bookcase could tip over. As the court of appeals noted, the issue of spoliation of evidence was raised, but not resolved, at the district court level. Foss, 746 N.W.2d at 918 . Although appellate courts generally do not resolve i …
|
| A07-1587 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2008-08-19 |
Dismissed
|
Hoeft v. Hennepin County
|
|
… ersy. This particular declaration is more properly characterized as a potential spoliation issue that appellants would raise before the district court in a hearing on the merits. See generally Patton v. Newmar Corp., 538 N.W.2d 116, 118-19 …
|
| A07-0584, A07-0788 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2008-06-03 |
Denied
|
Kidwell v. Sybaritic, Inc.
|
|
… tute the disk that had been sent to Atmore, and before At-more communicated his spoliation concerns to Kidwell. Not until those events did Kidwell develop a suspicion of a violation of a law or rule — the suspected violation that was commun …
|
| A07-313 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2008-04-08 |
Granted
|
Foss v. Kincade
|
|
… asserts that summary judgment should have been denied because of the Kincades’ spoliation of evidence. More than a year before this litigation was initiated, the Kincades disposed of the bookcase that fell on David. Foss asserts that he wa …
|
| A06-627 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2007-01-16 |
Affirmed
|
Phillips v. State
|
|
… erest to violate his due process rights, and by not sanctioning the college for spoliation of evidence. Because Phillips had only a unilateral, subjective expectation of future employment at the college and the college did not publicize its …
|
| A04-760, A04-1956 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2005-08-16 |
Denied
|
Foust v. McFairland
|
|
… eted. Appellants moved to dismiss respondents’ negligence claims, based on this spoliation of evidence. Alternatively, appellants requested a mistrial, continuance, or adverse inference instruction. A few days later, Lanterman, testifying o …
|
| A03-737 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2004-08-10 |
Denied
|
State v. Heath
|
|
… on of the allegedly exculpatory evidence, and there is no evidence of bad-faith spoliation; (2) the evidence in the record sufficiently supports the convictions; and (3) the court’s conduct during trial was proper, we affirm the convictions …
|
| C2-01-1942 |
Minn. |
2003-01-30 |
Denied
|
State v. Larivee
|
|
… sample while he was in custody and, therefore, it could not be used because of spoliation. Id. at 1156. Neither the district court decision nor the Montana case upon which it relied adequately addresses the appropriate authority for decidi …
|
| C2-02-90 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2002-09-10 |
Denied
|
Wajda v. Kingsbury
|
|
… ws. ISSUE Did the district court abuse its discretion by imposing sanctions for spoliation of evidence? ANALYSIS Spoliation is the destruction of evidence. Federated, Mut. Ins. Co., v. Litchfield Precision Components, Inc., 456 N.W.2d 434, …
|
| C5-98-949 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
1998-12-22 |
Dismissed
|
Hoffman v. Ford Motor Co.
|
|
… us. The trial court bifurcated the trial and first heard evidence as to notice, spoliation, and prejudice. After the first phase of the bifurcated trial, the court found that Daniel Hoffman’s telephone call to the dealer from whom he purcha …
|
| C4-96-2199 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
1997-07-08 |
Denied
|
Himes v. Woodings-Verona Tool Works, Inc.
|
|
… S 1. Exclusion of Expert Testimony and Report The decision on sanctions for the spoliation of evidence focuses on prejudice to the opposing party, even where the evidence was destroyed through “inadvertence or negligence” as opposed to will …
|
| C8-93-2546 |
Minn. |
1995-09-29 |
Granted
|
Patton v. Newmar Corp.
|
|
… n held that dismissal of the action was an excessive sanction for the negligent spoliation of evidence. Patton v. Newmar Corp., 520 N.W.2d 4 (Minn.App.1994). We reverse and reinstate the summary judgment entered in favor of defendant. Only …
|
| C8-93-2546 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
1994-09-28 |
Denied
|
Patton v. Newmar Corp.
|
|
… es the district court have authority to sanction a party for the destruction or spoliation of evidence in the absence of a violation of a court order or a finding of bad faith? II. Did the district court abuse its discretion by completely e …
|
| C6-89-2301, C1-89-2254 |
Minn. |
1990-05-25 |
Denied
|
Federated Mutual Insurance Co. v. Litchfield Precision Components, Inc.
|
|
… ppellants for negligently or intentionally destroying this evidence under a new spoliation tort not yet recognized in Minnesota. In denying appellants’ motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for summary judgment, the trial cour …
|
| 38,162 |
Minn. |
1962-01-05 |
Affirmed
|
Kmetz v. Johnson
|
|
… mmenting on this instruction, we said: “* * * The presumption, arising from the spoliation or suppression of evidence, that it would, if produced, be unfavorable to the party destroying or suppressing it, obtains with most force to the case …
|
| No. 24,366. |
Minn. |
1925-05-15 |
Affirmed
|
Knott v. Hawley
|
|
… e evidence for the claim. *241 A party’s suppression of evidential facts or his spoliation of documentary evidence is an unfavorable circumstance against his cause. Wigmore, Ev. (2d ed.) §§ 278, 2524. This is a matter of common logic and re …
|
| Nos. 16,934—(103) |
Minn. |
1910-12-16 |
Reversed, unless plaintiffs within twenty days from the filing of'the remittitur consent in writing that the amount for which ju
|
Evans v. Kohn
|
|
… ding sand converted by defendant to his own use was $1,000, and that because of spoliation the land was depreciated in value in the sum of $1,000, and as a conclusion judgment was ordered in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $1,000. 1. …
|
| Nos. 16,264—(46.) |
Minn. |
1909-11-05 |
Affirmed.
|
Spreng v. Juni
|
|
… change in a written contract by a stranger thereto is not an alteration, but a spoliation, which does not avoid it, and the obligee may enforce it in its original form, as if no change had been made. If the change is made by an agent havin …
|
| Nos. 10106-(55) |
Minn. |
1896-05-08 |
Affirmed.
|
State ex rel. Childs v. American Savings & Loan Ass'n
|
|
… d thereby vindicate the honor and sovereignty of the state, and prevent further spoliation of its citizens, unless, forsooth, a subordinate and appointive officer shall *355 first file with him a statement to the effect that such corporatio …
|
| Nos. 9510, 9511, 9512—(108, 109, 110) |
Minn. |
1895-06-28 |
Affirmed.
|
Minneapolis Western Railway Co. v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
|
|
… ably necessary to protect the property in his hands from destruction, waste, or spoliation, and that only in extraordinary cases, and where there is an irresistible necessity, should he continue such business for a long period of time. (4) …
|
| Nos. 9341—(196) |
Minn. |
1895-06-25 |
Reversed.
|
Swank v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
|
|
… tion. The clause inserted by defendant was a mere unauthorized interpolation or spoliation, and never was any part of the contract. A judgment for the rent necessarily implied an adjudication to that effect, because upon no other ground cou …
|
| cl-8012202 |
Minn. |
1891-08-24 |
Denied
|
Graham v. Burch
|
|
… the will itself should be destroyed, or bear some of the marks of defacement or spoliation, manifesting the intent to revoke. The act and intent must concur, and there must.be proof of both, though the intent may be inferred from the facts …
|
| cl-8011143 |
Minn. |
1889-05-24 |
Denied
|
Wilson v. Hayes
|
|
… ification or adoption, whichever it may be called. If the alteration was a mere spoliation by a third party, or if made by the holder by mistake or accident, or innocently and without fraudulent intent, so that it did not destroy the note, …
|
| cl-8010382 |
Minn. |
1887-02-01 |
Reversed
|
Russell v. Reed
|
|
… by a stranger; and, if so made, without the privity of the defendant, would be spoliation merely, and would not' deprive the defendant of his right to have the instrument restored and enforced as originally executed. Ames v. Brown, 22 Minn …
|