SPOILATION OF EVIDENCE (Fall 97 issue)

Vodusek v Bayliner Marine, Inc. 71 F.3d 148 (4th Cir 1995)
(available through Legal links on MAC’s home page)

This case involved an explosion aboard a Bayliner boat when the bilge pump was started a half hour after fueling. The owner operator eventually died of his injuries and his widow sued the manufacturer of the boat, Bayliner.

During the investigation of the cause of the accident, plaintiff hired an expert who, with the two sons of the widow "virtually attacked the boat with a chain saw and sledge hammer. The area which was critical to the theory eventually presented by Mr. Halsey, was literally ripped apart. . . Mr. Halsey’s activity made it impossible for his own theory to be verified or for the defendants to make a full and fair inspection to develop alternative theories based on the evidence."

As a result, defendant’s were permitted to include an affirmative defense based on the spoilage of evidence. The district court allowed this issue to go to the jury which handed down a defense verdict.

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed.

While most experts and attorneys are aware of the problems with changing an accident scene without allowing the other side access to it, this case serves as a strong reminder when one disregards this rule.

Home ! Search Page ! Master index ! Table of Contents for This Issue