After filing several motions, defendants in an asbestos case have had allegations of evidence spoliation dismissed by Judge Staci M. Yandle in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
The decision will dismiss Counts IV and V, which deal with the destruction or hiding of evidence. Judge Yandle pointed out that the plaintiff, Mr. Gerald D. Mcalvery, would be allowed to file another motion, should he be able to develop an evidence-based explanation that showed the defendants decided to withhold or destroy evidence. Mr. Mcalvery never expanded on his claim, resulting in its dismissal.
Mr. Mcalvery’s initial complaint alleged that the defendants were responsible for his exposure to asbestos, which resulted in personal injury. Asbestos, which has been banned since the 1970s, can be extremely hazardous to respiratory health, and long-term exposure to the toxin often results in the development of diseases, such as mesothelioma.
Courts rule in favor of asbestos plaintiffs on a regular basis, and the Illinois federal court made several attempts to ensure Mr. Mcalvery followed through with his lawsuit. This past summer, he was required to respond to three separate motions for dismissal. The deadline for his response was changed from July 28 to August 4, and then again to August 7. Mr. Mcalvery neglected to respond.
The court gave the plaintiff numerous chances because cases should not be decided by technicalities, according to the decision. “Courts are reluctant to dismiss a case on technical grounds and prefer to decide cases on their merits,” wrote Judge Yandle in her opinion. On October 20, Mr. Mcalvery was issued an order to show cause as to why he failed to respond to the motions. Although he was given ample opportunity to improve his claim and explain himself, Mr. Mcalvery provided no response.