Reynolds v. Bordelon

The Louisiana Supreme Court granted certiorari in this case to determine whether Louisiana recognized the tort of "negligent spoliation." On March 15, 2008, a multi-vehicle accident occurred in St. Tammany Parish. Plaintiff Richard Reynolds, sustained injuries and filed suit against Robert Bordelon, III, the driver alleged to have caused the accident. Plaintiff also asserted claims under the Louisiana Products Liability Act against Nissan North America, the alleged manufacturer and distributer of the plaintiff’s 2003 Infiniti G35, for failure of the airbag to deploy. Additionally, plaintiff’s petition alleged that his insurer, Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange (“ACIIE”) and the custodian of his vehicle after the accident, Insurance Auto Auctions Corporation (“IAA”), failed to preserve his vehicle for inspection purposes to determine whether any defects existed, despite being put on notice of the need for preservation. ACIIE and IAA each filed exceptions of no cause of action, arguing a claim of spoliation of evidence requires “an intentional destruction of evidence for the purpose of depriving opposing parties of its use” and the petition contained no allegation of an intentional act by ACIIE or IAA. The trial court sustained the exception but allowed the plaintiff to amend his petition within fifteen days to state a cause of action pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art. 934. In response, ACIIE and IAA again filed exceptions of no cause of action, and ACIIE filed a motion for summary judgment, in the alternative. The trial court denied the exceptions and the motion for summary judgment in light of an opinion recently released by the First Circuit Court of Appeal, which discussed, in dicta, the theory of "negligent spoliation." The court of appeal denied writs, with one judge on the panel noting the court "ha[d] not issued a studied opinion regarding whether a cause of action exists for negligent spoliation of evidence." A later decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeal was released, wherein the concept of negligent spoliation was rejected, prompting ACIIE and IAA to renew their exceptions of no cause of action. After its review, the Louisiana Court held that no cause of action existed for negligent spoliation of evidence. "Regardless of any alleged source of the duty, whether general or specific, public policy in our state precludes the existence of a duty to preserve evidence. Thus, there is no tort. Alternative avenues of recourse are available within Louisiana’s evidentiary, discovery, and contractual laws." View "Reynolds v. Bordelon" on Justia Law