In the case of Elliott-Thomas v. Smith, 154 Ohio St.3d 11, 2018-Ohio-1783, the Ohio Supreme Court held that the intentional interference with and/or concealment of evidence are not actionable claims under the tort of spoliation of evidence because the tort of spoliation of evidence requires the “willful destruction of evidence” in an ongoing litigation. Elliott-Thomas at ¶ 11.
In this case, two school board members and their legal counsel allegedly interfered with and/or concealed evidence in a wrongful termination case. The employee sued the school board members and legal counsel arguing that these actions made the school board members and legal counsel liable for the tort of spoliation of evidence. While the school board members and legal counsel did not allegedly physically destroy the evidence, the employee argued that the interference with and/or concealment of evidence is sufficient for the tort of spoliation of evidence.
The Ohio Supreme Court found that “[i]ntentional spoliation is not the appropriate cause of action when evidence is concealed, but not destroyed, because late-produced evidence [* * *] can still be presented to the fact finder for a ruling on the merits.” Elliott-Thomas at ¶ 14. The Ohio Supreme Court further found that any concerns regarding the interference or concealment of evidence are better dealt with by a court order under the rules for discovery.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.