Federal Court Cites Evidentiary Principles in Finding Park Service Negligent in Child’s Death
As reported in the San Francisco Chronicle, a federal judge issued a ruling on Tuesday that penalizes government officials for destroying evidence and finds the National Park Service negligent in the death of a boy from Red Bluff. In July 2009, the Botell family was visiting Lassen Volcanic National Park and paused for a photo with 9 year-old Tommy and 13 year-old Katrina seated on a concrete trailside wall. The wall gave way beneath the siblings, crushing Tommy’s skull and leaving Katrina with a fractured jaw and head injuries. Tommy died as a result of the injuries.
The Botell family brought suit against the government. Although they uncovered documents and witnesses who supported their claim that the Park Service knew the wall was dangerous, the family’s lawyers could not examine the remains of the wall because it had already been destroyed pursuant to the park superintendent’s orders. U. S. Magistrate Gregory Hollows found that Park Service policy required the wall be preserved and that staff had also willfully destroyed documents about the wall’s condition. This week, U.S. District Judge Troy Nunley upheld these findings. In doing so, the Sacramento-based Judge also found the government had forfeited the right to deny that it was negligent in Tyler’s death.
While this is a major ruling, it does not resolve the Butell’s case. A future hearing will examine the government’s claim that the Park Service is immune from suit.
An Overview of Spoliation & Its Role in Protecting the Truth
Spoliation is the legal term for the intentional destruction or alteration of evidence that makes the evidence unusable of otherwise invalid. At one time, California had a specific legal claim for spoliation but that has been eliminated in favor of an evidentiary rule. State and federal courts operate under distinct but often similar evidentiary rules. These principles are spelled out in the Federal Rules of Evidence, the California Evidence Code, and in the Rules of Civil Procedure for the state and federal courts. Both court systems provide sanctions for the failure of a party to comply with discovery obligations. The severity of the sanction varies. In some cases, the court will apply a “spoliation inference” and assume that the evidence was unfavorable to the destroying party. This concept can also be found in the California Civil Jury Instructions, which provide: “You may consider whether one party intentionally concealed or destroyed evidence. If you decide that a party did so, you may decide that the evidence would have been unfavorable to that party.” California’s Supreme Court allows trial courts to vary this instruction to fit the circumstances of the case, making the sanction fit the conduct and imposing less severe sanctions where warranted.
The rules of evidence can be complex and an understanding of these principles is one of the reasons victims should always hire an experienced Northern California personal injury attorney when resolving a claim. While the spoliation rules can be harsh, they recognize that justice requires accurate, unaltered evidence. This is why one of the first steps we often take when instituting a personal injury or wrongful death action is sending a letter to the other side directing them to preserve all evidence relating to the case. This letter helps ensure that the spoliation inference will operate if the opposing party intentionally destroys evidence. It also helps establish the fact that our team is committed to seeking justice for our client and will use the substantive and procedural laws to ensure our clients get the monetary damages they deserve.
See Related Blog Posts:
Do You Need to Document Your Accident With a Police Report?
Sacramento Nursing Home Neglect Hidden By Falsified Records
(Photo by Brian Turner)
As your San Francisco nursing home abuse law firm, we understand that aging individuals and their families often face many tough decisions. It is difficult to come to the conclusion that your loved one can no longer live alone, especially when the loved one has long been the caretaker and suddenly finds him or herself in need of care. When facing this reality, it is important to be aware of the different levels of residential senior care available. In general, there are three primary categories of senior living options available:
Statistics on Construction Zone Accidents
Landlord/tenant disputes are common, although few rise to the level that one imagines must have existed between Modeste and Machado. While state, federal, and local laws include some fundamental protections for both tenants and landlords, a well-crafted lease can help prevent future disputes. California law allows for short-term oral leases that are binding on both parties. Oral leases are presumed to be month-to-month. However, as detailed in a tenant handbook provided by the 
It was supposed to be a night of fun, with recent bride Neriza Fojas and eight of her fellow nurses hitting the town to celebrate her recent nuptials. 
Almost every teenager has asked the question at least once, and many parents and educators have struggled to provide an answer beyond “it’s the law” – Why 21, why not 18 (or 16, or no restriction)? Mothers Against Drunk Driving takes a look at the age restriction in a 
Surprisingly, the most comprehensive, detailed report analyzing motorcycle accidents and their causes is more than thirty years old. In 1981, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released the results of a study led by Harry Hurt, titled
In October, the unidentified victim was notified that she had won a sweepstakes jackpot totaling more than half a million dollars. She was told that she needed to send a $4,000 fee to an agent, an amount the callers said represented a “nonresidential tax.” The victim complied. After doing so, another individual contacted the victim, saying that he was from the FBI and regretted to inform her that she had not won a prize but instead had been the target of a scam. He told the woman that the $4,000 had been used by recently-arrested murderers to purchase guns and that she would need to pay $25,000 to avoid litigation. Additional calls, now believed to have originated from Jamaica, followed with people posing as CIA and IRS agents and asking for additional money. Eventually, Jacqueline Dove arrived at the victim’s home and, using the password “In God We Trust,” collected these funds. Even after authorities became aware of the scheme and arrested Dove, the victim continued to receive calls from other scammers involved in the fraudulent scheme who are still asking for money.
Police Suspect Speeding Led to Horrific San Jose Crash 
Current and Proposed Provisional License Rules