Injured Worker’s Evidence Spoliation Request Denied After Employer Erases Video Footage

A Virginia public school employee is facing a significant hurdle in his workers’ compensation claim appeal due to the absence of crucial video evidence. This video, which he believes would demonstrate how and when he was injured at work, was erased by his employer, Newport News Public Schools, before he had the chance to request it. This has led him to accuse the school system of spoliation of evidence.

Last September, a deputy commissioner from the Virginia Workers’ Compensation Commission (VWCC) dismissed the spoliation claim, and just last week, the full VWCC upheld that decision. The employee had filed his workers’ compensation claim on June 24, 2024, asserting that he suffered a compensable injury by accident on April 9, 2024.

Initially, his employer denied the claim. During the appeal process, the claimant requested that the record remain open to address the issue of the workplace video, which he believed would support his case. He contended that Newport News Public Schools was made aware of the April 9, 2024, accident shortly after it occurred. Furthermore, he indicated that the school had notice of his claim for benefits when he filed on June 24, 2024, and that he had sought a copy of the video as early as November 21, 2024.

“At some point during that short window of time, the employer either destroyed or lost the video. The employer should not be allowed to benefit from its failure to preserve the video,” the claimant argued. He maintained that the missing video constituted spoliation of evidence, asserting that the school system should have anticipated his pursuit of a claim and that preserving a short video clip would have posed a minimal burden.

In response, Newport News Public Schools denied any wrongdoing, stating that the video from the incident had been erased in accordance with their standard procedures after 30 days. This action occurred approximately six weeks before the claimant filed his appeal. The school district emphasized that it was unaware of any potential litigation involving the video at the time it was destroyed and insisted that there was no intention or bad faith involved in the decision to erase it.

The VWCC deputy commissioner ultimately dismissed the spoliation claim, concluding that the employer was not aware of the video’s potential relevance before it was routinely erased. The deputy commissioner noted that legal precedents indicate that for spoliation to be established, the party in possession of the evidence must either be aware or should reasonably be aware of its relevance to probable or pending litigation.

The claimant subsequently appealed this ruling regarding the evidence. However, the full VWCC declined to review the deputy’s decision, stating that while the commission has the discretion to grant such appeals, this right is typically reserved for final decisions or awards. The VWCC also pointed out that it generally avoids interlocutory reviews on evidentiary or procedural matters unless good cause is demonstrated, which they found lacking in this case.

Furthermore, the VWCC determined that the claimant would not suffer substantial prejudice if an interlocutory review was not granted. The panel highlighted that the worker had two eyewitnesses willing to testify about the incident, mitigating any potential harm from the absence of the video evidence.

Topics
Commercial Lines
Workers’ Compensation
Business Insurance