Judge Arthur Spatt
Dwyer, an auto technician at a Chevrolet dealership, was hurt while repairing the left front shock absorber—installed several days prior—on a Chevrolet Suburban. The shock absorber exploded off the Suburban, amputating part of a finger on Dwyer’s dominant hand. Dwyer claimed the accident resulted from manufacturing defects in the threading of the shock absorber’s piston and piston shaft/rod, leading to the shaft/rod’s separation, and resulting inability to control suspension spring tension. The court denied dismissal for spoliation of evidence. It did not believe that Dwyer destroyed or significantly altered relevant evidence by cutting open the shock absorber’s exterior casing to access its interior. General Motors did not explain how removing part of the absorber’s exterior, necessary to access its piston, destroyed or altered the piston or the piston shaft/rod. However, instructed by Dahoda v. John Deere Co., MetLife Auto & Home v. Broan-Nutone LLC and Wade v. Tiffin Motor Homes, district court precluded Dwyer’s expert from testifying about the condition of—or testing on—the shock absorber before its exterior casing was cut open. The court also permitted the jury to draw an adverse inference from the exterior casing’s removal.
