## Facts

- Frank Aloi, a Union Pacific Railroad conductor, was assigned to work a train departing from North Platte, Nebraska.
- Before departure, Aloi tripped and fell while descending interior locomotive stairs and observed a loose rubber mat covering a step riser.
- Aloi promptly reported the incident; Union Pacific personnel inspected the stairwell, photographed it, and documented the loose mat as a tripping hazard.
- Union Pacific was required to conduct periodic inspections and retain certain inspection and maintenance records for at least 92 days, and it maintained a practice of destroying such records after that period unless litigation relevance was anticipated.
- After Aloi’s attorneys notified Union Pacific of an intended personal-injury suit, Union Pacific nonetheless destroyed inspection and maintenance records for the period immediately before and after the fall, attributing the destruction to employee error.
- Aloi sued under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, alleging negligence based on the unsafe stairwell condition; during pretrial litigation, the destroyed records became an issue.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by giving an adverse-inference instruction as a spoliation sanction after finding Union Pacific willfully destroyed relevant evidence.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by repeating the spoliation instruction during trial, including by interrupting cross-examination, thereby unfairly prejudicing Union Pacific.

## Decision

- The Colorado Supreme Court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in giving an adverse-inference instruction based on a finding that Union Pacific willfully destroyed relevant evidence after notice of potential litigation.
- The Court further held the trial court did not abuse its discretion by repeating the instruction during trial, including during cross-examination, because the timing and repetition were within the trial court’s authority to manage the trial and clarify the law for the jury.
- The Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the court of appeals’ judgment and remanded for consideration of remaining appellate issues not reached by the court of appeals.

## Legal Principles

- Trial courts have broad discretion to impose sanctions for spoliation of evidence, including permitting an adverse inference that destroyed evidence would have been unfavorable to the party responsible for its destruction.
- An adverse-inference instruction is especially appropriate where evidence is willfully destroyed after a party knows or should know it is relevant to pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation.
- Spoliation sanctions serve both remedial and punitive purposes: mitigating prejudice to the opposing party and deterring destruction of relevant evidence.
- Appellate review of spoliation sanctions and related jury-instruction decisions is for abuse of discretion; reversal requires more than disagreement with the trial court’s chosen method and depends on whether the approach was unreasonable or unfairly biased the jury in context.

## Conclusion

The Colorado Supreme Court upheld the use of an adverse-inference spoliation instruction where the trial court found willful destruction of relevant records after notice of a claim, and it approved the trial court’s discretion to repeat the instruction during trial, including during witness examination, absent a showing of unfair prejudice.


Aloi v. Union Pac. R.R. Corp., 129 P.3d 999 (Colo. 2006)