Triple R Industries, Inc. v. Century Lubricating Oils, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a duty to preserve information arises when the party has “some notice that the documents are potentially relevant”
• defining inquiry as whether party that destroyed documents “was on notice that the [documents] had potential relevance to litigation”
• “Generally, a trier of fact may draw an adverse inference from the destruction of evidence relevant to a case.” (emphasis added)
• A duty to preserve information arises when the party has “some notice that the documents are potentially relevant”
• “Generally, a trier of fact may draw an adverse inference from the destruction of evidence relevant to a case.”
• \Defendants engage in spoliation of documents as a matter of law only if they had `some notice that the documents were potentially relevant' to the litigation before they were destroyed.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).