Yet again, defendants’ bad faith costs them dearly.  In Swofford v. Eslinger, Robert Swofford brought a § 1983 claim and state law claims of battery, negligent training, and supervision against defendants William Morris and Ronald Remus, two Deputies for the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office (“SCSO”), and Donald Eslinger, the Sheriff of Seminole County, State of Florida.  Swofford was shot seven times by the Deputies on his own property after being misidentified as a burglar, and spent six weeks in the hospital.

Swofford’s attorney sent two letters to SCSO requesting that all evidence related to the shooting be maintained in its original order.  Upon receipt of the letters, SCSO never issued any directives or “litigation hold memos” to prevent the destruction of relevant evidence.  The senior members of SCSO who saw the two letters from Swofford’s attorney did not communicate with any other employees of SCSO to maintain evidence relevant to Swofford’s case.

The Court set out the legal standard for spoliation, defined as “the intentional destruction, mutilation, alteration, or concealment of evidence.”  Sanctions for spoliation are designed to insure the integrity of the discovery process.  In the Eleventh Circuit, sanctions for spoliation are appropriate only where there is a showing of bad faith – mere negligence on the defendants’ behalf is not enough.  The Court had no difficulty finding bad faith, stating, “nothing other than bad faith can be inferred from the facts of this case.”  Defendants’ blatant disregard to preserve evidence was so obvious that it was classified by the court as “knowing and willful disregard.”

The Court granted Swofford’s motion for spoliation sanctions.  The Court awarded an adverse inference instruction against SCSO for the destruction of all emails over the course of a one year period; a rebuttable presumption in favor of Swofford that the defendants’ radios and accessories would yield evidence adverse to their case; and an adverse inference instruction that Remus’s laptop, which was destroyed, contained information detrimental to SCSO and Remus’s defense of the case.  Additionally, the Court awarded attorney’s fees and costs to Swofford, against all defendants jointly and severally.