DeMeo v. Kean

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that erased and destroyed video recordings in control of defendants was “sufficient circumstantial evidence to permit a jury to determine whether [the defendants] conspired . . . to partially erase and/or destroy the video evidence.”
• imposing adverse inference because defendant failed to preserve relevant video viewed multiple times before its loss
• granting summary judgment where the plaintiff failed to show “any discussion, offer to assist, request for assistance, or other indication of an agreement” between the defendants
• denying summary judgment where defendants allegedly conspired to destroy video evidence of an assault

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).