New Cases Bring Lessons On Video Surveillance Preservation

By Donna Fisher and Matthew Hamilton (June 17, 2020, 5:25 PM EDT) -- Video surveillance is ubiquitous today and often sought in connection with injuries or litigation. As a result, courts are increasingly presented with disputes relating to the preservation and production of surveillance video.

Recently, in Charoff v. MarMaxx Operating Corp.,[1] the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania — without reference to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e), which governs the imposition of sanctions for the loss of electronically stored information, or ESI — held that MarMaxx's failure to produce the requested video, or articulate a reason why there was none, warranted a negative inference instruction.

Other recent decisions, however,...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!


Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!