Recent Developments in California Regarding Spoliation of Evidence

A California court ruled that a church could be sued for “spoliation of evidence” because it destroyed a vehicle that had been involved in an accident.

Church Law and Tax 1998-07-01

Spoliation of Evidence

Church property

Key point. A church may be liable on the basis of “spoliation of evidence” if it intentionally or negligently destroys a vehicle or other property that may be relevant in pending or future litigation.

A California court ruled that a church could be sued for “spoliation of evidence” because it destroyed a vehicle that had been involved in an accident. A woman passenger in a church van was injured when the van rolled over. She sued the church. The church claimed that the accident was due to a tire blowout rather than any negligence on the part of the church or its driver. Further, the church argued that the passenger had not been wearing her seatbelt and this was the primary cause of her injuries. About six months after the accident the church destroyed the van. A few years later the passenger sued the church in a second lawsuit. This time she alleged that the church was liable for negligently and intentionally “spoiling” or destroying evidence. She asserted that the church knew that she was investigating her legal claims arising from the accident, and that the van “represented valuable and irreplaceable physical evidence in the investigation and litigation concerning the accident and to refute [the church’s] assertion that she did not have her seatbelt on at the time of the accident.” She insisted that the church had a duty to maintain and preserve the van until the litigation was resolved. A state court agreed that the church could be sued for “spoliation of evidence.” It defined “spoliation of evidence” as “the destruction or significant alteration of evidence, or the failure to preserve property for another’s use as evidence, in pending or future litigation.” The court acknowledged that “liability for spoliation of evidence is a developing body of law,” but it referred to several other cases in which California courts have recognized this basis of liability for both intentional and negligent acts. However, the court concluded that the church could not be liable because the passenger filed her lawsuit after the statute of limitations had expired. This result in no way minimizes the court’s recognition of “spoliation of evidence” as a basis of liability.

Application. This case should be carefully considered by all church leaders. It is common for churches to be sued as result of accidents involving church vehicles. If the damage to the church vehicle is severe, church leaders often make provision for the destruction of the vehicle. Such a decision may lead to unexpected liability, as this case reveals. The same may be true if the church repairs or sells such a vehicle. Also note that this kind of liability may not be covered under the church’s general liability insurance policy. The lesson is clear-church leaders should not sell, destroy, repair, or otherwise alter or dispose of a vehicle that was involved in an accident without first seeking the advice of an attorney. The same recommendation applies to any other church—owned property that may be relevant in the pending or future litigation. Fuller v. Bethany Apostolic Church, 71 Cal. Rptr. 915 (Cal. App. 1998).

Related Topics:

This content is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. "From a Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations." Due to the nature of the U.S. legal system, laws and regulations constantly change. The editors encourage readers to carefully search the site for all content related to the topic of interest and consult qualified local counsel to verify the status of specific statutes, laws, regulations, and precedential court holdings.

ajax-loader-largecaret-downcloseHamburger Menuicon_amazonApple PodcastsBio Iconicon_cards_grid_caretChild Abuse Reporting Laws by State IconChurchSalary Iconicon_facebookGoogle Podcastsicon_instagramLegal Library IconLegal Library Iconicon_linkedinLock IconMegaphone IconOnline Learning IconPodcast IconRecent Legal Developments IconRecommended Reading IconRSS IconSubmiticon_select-arrowSpotify IconAlaska State MapAlabama State MapArkansas State MapArizona State MapCalifornia State MapColorado State MapConnecticut State MapWashington DC State MapDelaware State MapFederal MapFlorida State MapGeorgia State MapHawaii State MapIowa State MapIdaho State MapIllinois State MapIndiana State MapKansas State MapKentucky State MapLouisiana State MapMassachusetts State MapMaryland State MapMaine State MapMichigan State MapMinnesota State MapMissouri State MapMississippi State MapMontana State MapMulti State MapNorth Carolina State MapNorth Dakota State MapNebraska State MapNew Hampshire State MapNew Jersey State MapNew Mexico IconNevada State MapNew York State MapOhio State MapOklahoma State MapOregon State MapPennsylvania State MapRhode Island State MapSouth Carolina State MapSouth Dakota State MapTennessee State MapTexas State MapUtah State MapVirginia State MapVermont State MapWashington State MapWisconsin State MapWest Virginia State MapWyoming State IconShopping Cart IconTax Calendar Iconicon_twitteryoutubepauseplay