Botey v. Green et al

Filing 124

ORDER THAT Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence (Doc. 74) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, to wit: 1. Plaintiffs request that an adverse inference jury instruction be read against Defendants at the time of trial is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs request that Defendants be precluded from arguing in dispositive motions that Plaintiff lacks evidence to prove his corporate negligence claims against Defendants FFE and Conwell based on the documents destroyed is GRANTED in so far as Defendants are precluded from proving the contents of the destroyed documents by other means or argue their contents in dispositive motions or at trial.Signed by Honorable Robert D. Mariani on 4/4/16. (jfg)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JONATHAN BOTEY

Plaintiff,

v.

3:12·CV·01520
(JUDGE MARIANI)

ROBERT GREEN, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
AND NOW, THIS 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2016, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT

Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence (Doc. 74) is GRANTED IN PART
AND DENIED IN PART, to wit:

1. Plaintiffs request that an adverse inference jury instruction be read against
Defendants at the time of trial is DENIED.
2. Plaintiffs request that Defendants be precluded from arguing in dispositive motions
that Plaintiff lacks evidence to prove his corporate negligence claims against
Defendants FFE and Conwell based on the documents destroyed is GRANTED in so
far as Defendants are precluded from proving the contents of the destroyed
documents by other means or argue their contents in dispositive motions or at trial.