Volume 11

Case Search

RAIFORD LAMAR BRINSON, Plaintiff, v. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut corporation, and THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, an Illinois corporation, Defendants.

11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 117a

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Evidence — Duplicate document — Authenticity — Torts — Spoliation of evidence — Plaintiff who sought UM benefits under policy issued to employer challenging admission of copy of UM coverage selection/rejection form, which insurer produced because original selection/rejection form had been destroyed by insurer, on ground that copy showed alteration in what was written on original, and on further ground that insurer had in bad faith purposely destroyed original — Plaintiff failed to show that there is genuine issue as to authenticity of copy — Even if genuine issue as to authenticity were raised, copy is admissible, and plaintiff is not entitled to partial summary judgment as to effect of spoliation or destruction of evidence — Plaintiff’s argument that insurer lost or destroyed original in bad faith and plaintiff’s spoliation claim consist of nothing more than conclusory statements that original form reflected selection of UM coverage, that form was destroyed to obscure this evidence, and that copy was altered — This argument is contradicted by depositions and affidavits that it was insured’s corporate policy to reject UM coverage in states where it was permissible, that plaintiff’s employer did desire and intend to reject UM coverage, and that original form was destroyed in normal course of business after microfilming — Plaintiff has neither rebutted this evidence nor set forth evidence that he is unable to prove his prima facie case due to absence of the original form — Adverse presumption or jury instruction is not warranted — Plaintiff will have opportunity to explore possible alteration of form and whether employer did, in fact, knowingly reject UM coverage at trial through testimony of witnesses and production of evidence, and counsel may argue adverse inferences to be drawn from the evidence as part of closing argument

Read More »
Skip to content