Spoliation of Evidence in Maryland
Obviously, in fairness
to all parties, the best practice with respect to evidence in
a case is to preserve all potential evidence until all legal proceeds
have began and concluded. The intentional or negligent destruction
or spoliation of evidence threatens the integrity of our judicial
system. Naturally, as lawyers, you can assume we will come up
with a Latin expression to address this problem: omnia praesumuntur
contra spoliatem, which means "all things are presumed against
the spoliator."
Maryland has adopted this maxim because
of the logical presumption that one would not ordinarily destroy
evidence favorable to himself. Accordingly, under Maryland law,
the destruction or alteration of evidence by a party gives rise
to inferences or presumptions unfavorable to the spoliator. Unexplained
and intentional destruction of evidence by a litigant gives rise
to an inference that the evidence would have been unfavorable
to his cause. Maryland law does not require a showing of bad faith
to support this inference. Anderson v. Litzenberg, 115
Md. App. 549, 561-562 (1997) (case involving accident caused by a dump truck tarp coming lose and causing an accident; presumption that from the destruction of the tarp, there was a rebuttable presumption that the destruction of the tarp should be lead to an inference that it the tarp would show evidence unfavorable to defendant). See also Larsen v. Romeo, 254 Md. 220, 255 (1969).
Accordingly, in truck accident and car
accident cases, it is important for accident attorneys to pin
down early in an investigation what evidence might be available
that could be intentionally on inadvertently destroyed.
Back to Maryland Truck Accidents
Back to Maryland Truck Accident Lawyer Blog
Back to Maryland Personal Injury Attorney Help Center
Back to Maryland Truck Accident Lawyer Web Site
Back to What Maryland Truck Accident Lawyers Should Know About the Trucking Industry
Back to Spoilation of Trucking Logs