Attorneys obtained the dismissal of a professional liability complaint against a defendant law firm with prejudice and an order imposing sanctions, based upon plaintiff's willful spoliation of computer hard drive during discovery

Attorneys obtained the dismissal of a professional liability complaint against a defendant law firm with prejudice and an order imposing sanctions, based upon plaintiff's willful spoliation of computer hard drive during discovery. The Superior Court, affirmed the trial court's orders. The hard drive was crucial evidence to show the timing of the plaintiffs' knowledge that they had a potential claim for professional negligence because it contained the husband plaintiff's notes concerning conversations with the defendant firm regarding the underlying claim for which the firm had been hired. Upon learning of the existence of husband plaintiff's computer log at a deposition, the attorneys' insisted upon examining the laptop and discovered an anomaly whereby the modification date of the subject document pre-dated its creation date, thus requiring a forensic examination of the hard drive. The plaintiffs refused to produce the hard drive despite discovery requests and a court order. The Superior Court rejected the plaintiffs' arguments that the trial judge had sua sponte raised the spoliation theory and also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by not calling an expert and instead itself deciding that the computer disk offered by plaintiffs was not an acceptable substitute for the actual hard drive.