MBE Rules · Torts
Spoliation
Spoliation of evidence
The rule
Most states (including California) reject a separate tort for spoliation; remedies are evidentiary — adverse-inference instructions, issue sanctions, and discovery penalties against the destroying party.
In plain English
Spoliation refers to the destruction or alteration of evidence that is relevant to a legal proceeding. While most states do not recognize spoliation as a standalone tort, they allow courts to impose penalties on the party that destroyed the evidence, such as instructing the jury to assume the evidence would have been unfavorable to that party.
Worked example
In a personal injury case, the defendant accidentally deleted surveillance footage that showed the accident. The court found that the deletion constituted spoliation and instructed the jury to infer that the footage would have been harmful to the defendant's case. As a result, the jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
Memory hook
Spoliation: Don't destroy the proof, or you might lose the case!
The trap
Exams often present scenarios where evidence is destroyed, leading students to mistakenly argue for a separate tort instead of focusing on the evidentiary penalties available. Students may also overlook the specific remedies that can be applied in spoliation cases.
How examiners test it
Questions about spoliation typically involve fact patterns where evidence is lost or destroyed, prompting candidates to identify the appropriate remedies rather than a standalone tort claim.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.