In Brookshire Brothers, Ltd. v. Aldridge, No. 10-0846 (Tex. July 3, 2014), the Texas Supreme Court held that a spoliation instruction may not be given to a jury absent a finding that the spoliation was intentional.  At issue in this premises-liability case was whether the trial court erred in providing the jury with a spoliation instruction where the defendant retained a portion of a surveillance video that recorded the plaintiff’s fall, but allowed additional footage to be automatically erased.  The court explained that “the harsh remedy of a spoliation instruction is warranted only when the trial court finds that the spoliating party acted with the specific intent of concealing discoverable evidence, and that a less severe remedy would be insufficient to reduce the prejudice caused by the spoliation.”  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by issuing a permissive adverse inference instruction and allowing the jury to hear evidence regarding the spoliation because there was no evidence that the defendant allowed the additional footage to be erased “with the requisite intent to conceal or destroy relevant evidence or that [the plaintiff] was irreparably deprived of any meaningful ability to present his claim.”