Sentis Group, et al. v. Shell Oil Co., et al., No. 12-3623 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseSentis filed suit against Shell, alleging contract and fraud claims, and violations of Missouri franchise laws as well as the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 2801 et seq. The court agreed with the district court's conclusion that Sentis' failure to preserve evidence caused sufficient prejudice to defendants to serve as sanctionable spoliation. Dismissal with prejudice was the appropriate sanction given plaintiffs' cumulative pattern of conduct in this matter and given the nature of the missing evidence and its role in Sentis' and Shell's cases. The court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Civil case - Civil Procedure. For the court's prior opinion in the matter, see Sentis Group, Inc. v. Shell Oil Co., 559 F.3d 888 (8th Cir. 2009). District court did not err in determining plaintiff's failure to preserve certain evidence under its control was sanctionable spoilation, and the court did not err in concluding that dismissal of the case with prejudice was the appropriate sanction.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.