Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)

Citation
Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Parent Document
Gallagher v. Magner Ex Rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement, 619 F.3d 823 (2010)
Effective Date
2010-09-01

Other Sections in This Document (106)

Full Text

686 chars
Also critical to our decision is the magistrate judge’s conclusion that the City
did not intentionally destroy or withhold evidence in an attempt to suppress the truth.
See Greyhound Lines, 485 F.3d at 1035 (“The ultimate focus for imposing sanctions
for spoliation of evidence is the intentional destruction of evidence indicating a desire
to suppress the truth[.]”). To be sure, a district court does not abuse its discretion by
imposing sanctions, even absent an explicit bad faith finding, where a party destroys
specifically requested evidence after litigation has commenced. Stevenson, 354 F.3d
at 749–50. However, where a court expressly finds, as here, that there is no evidence