Summary
The court denies Plaintiff Hugh Brian Street’s emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction seeking to preserve possible video evidence of an incident involving Louisiana State Police officials. The court discusses the duty to preserve evidence and spoliation but finds no indication that court intervention is warranted because the evidence may already have been preserved and its existence is uncertain.
Holdings
- The court denied Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction because the record did not show that the preservation request had not been honored, that the recordings existed or had existed, or that judicial intervention was warranted.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff was entitled to emergency injunctive relief requiring preservation of potentially relevant video recordings.
- Whether the record established a sufficient preservation concern or duty warranting court intervention.
Disposition
denied
Cases Cited (5)
- Quantlab Technologies Ltd. (BGI) v. Godlevsky, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20305, 2014 WL 651944, *7-*8 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 19, 2014)(followed)
- Andra Group, LP v. JDA Software Group, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182527, 2015 WL 12731762, *15 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 9, 2015)(followed)
- Silvestri v. General Motors Corp., 271 F.3d 583 (4th Cir. 2001)(followed)
- Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata, 688 F. Supp. 2d 598, 612 (S.D. Tex. 2010)(followed)
- Dixon v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159714, 2014 WL 6087226, *3 (M.D. La. Nov. 13, 2014)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…