In Stinson v. City of New York, No. 10 Civ. 4228 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 5, 2016), the district court granted in part plaintiffs’ motion seeking sanctions for spoliation of ESI that plaintiffs believed would illustrate a New York Police Department practice of summons quotas.  The court found that NYPD was grossly negligent in destroying responsive ESI based on several factors.  First, NYPD did not issue a litigation hold on responsive documents until three years into the lawsuit.  Second, the court found that the litigation hold was ineffectual because it was not read to all department commands as required, and police officers continued to destroy ESI.  Third, NYPD maintained policies and practices of document retention that were certain to result in lost responsive ESI if a litigation hold was not properly implemented.  Finally, the court compared responsive NYPD emails plaintiffs obtained outside of discovery with the paucity of responsive emails produced by NYPD in discovery to conclude that responsive ESI was likely lost due to NYPD’s gross negligence.  Accordingly, the court instructed the jury that the “absence of documentary evidence does not in this case establish the absence of a summons quota policy.”