PETITION OF FRESCATI SHIPPING COMPANY, LTD., as owner of the M/T ATHOS I and TSAKOS SHIPPING & TRADING, S.A., as manager of the ATHOS I for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability

Filing 873

ORDER THAT DEFTS' MOTION TO DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES BECAUSE OF PLFFS' SPOLIATION OF VESSEL RECORDS (DOC. NO. 754) IS DENIED. DEFTS' MOTION TO ENFORCE THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE AND TO EXCLUDE AND DISREGARD SECONDARY EVIDENCE & TESTIMONY OFFERED INSTEAD OF ORIGINAL EVIDENCE LOST OR DESTROYED IN BAD FAITH (DOC NO. 755) IS DENIED.SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 7/25/16.7/25/16 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED: COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PARTIES.(kw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
In re Petition of FRESCATI SHIPPING
COMPANY, LTD., as the Owner of the M/T
ATHOS I, and TSAKOS SHIPPING &
TRADING, S.A., as Manager of the M/T
ATHOS I, for Exoneration from or Limitation
of Liability

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 05-cv-305 (JHS)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

CONSOLIDATED

Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 08-cv-2898 (JHS)

CITGO ASPHALT REFINING COMPANY,
et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
AND NOW, this 25th day of July 2016, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to
Draw Adverse Inferences Because of Plaintiffs’ Spoliation of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 754),
Frescati Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Draw Adverse Inferences
Because of Plaintiffs’ Alleged Spoliation of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 765), Defendant’s Reply
to Response to Motion (Doc. No. 777), Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule
and to Exclude and Disregard Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original
Evidence Lost or Destroyed in Bad Faith (Doc. No. 755), Frescati Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition
to Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule and to Exclude and Disregard
Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original Evidence Lost or Destroyed in

1

Bad Faith (Doc. No. 766), Defendants’ Reply to Response to Motion (Doc. No. 776), and in
accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ Motion to Draw Adverse Inferences Because of Plaintiffs’ Spoliation
of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 754) is DENIED.
2. Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule and to Exclude and
Disregard Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original
Evidence Lost or Destroyed in Bad Faith (Doc. No. 755) is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.

2