Case Summary

Pandel Ludwig fell on an icy sidewalk while leaving the fitness center at an apartment complex owned by Flaherty & Collins, Inc.  A few days later, Ludwig’s boyfriend suggested to the apartment’s office staff that security cameras may have recorded the fall.  An employee reviewed surveillance footage but determined cameras inside the fitness center did not capture the fall because their view of the door was blocked by exercise equipment.  Ludwig later sent a letter asking the apartment to preserve any video of the fall.  By the time the apartment received it, its security system had automatically deleted all footage from the day of the incident. 

 

At trial, Ludwig presented evidence that one camera had an unobstructed view of the sidewalk next to where she had fallen that wouldn’t have captured her fall but might have shown whether the apartment salted the sidewalk earlier in the day.  She argued that if so, the jury could “be pretty darn sure [the apartment] would keep” the footage.  Ludwig moved the trial court for a spoliation of evidence instruction, which the court rejected.  However, the court did not limit Ludwig from arguing spoliation during closing arguments.  The jury returned a verdict for the apartment, finding Ludwig 90% at fault for her injuries.  Ludwig moved for a new trial, which the court denied. 

 

On appeal, Ludwig contends the trial court erred in failing to give the spoliation instruction and that the way the jury completed the verdict form calls into question whether they understood the effect of their verdict.

Pandel Ludwig v. Flaherty & Collins, Inc.
When:THU, FEB 12, 2026 at 11:00 AM
Rescheduled from WED, JAN 14, 2026 at 1:30 PMCourt:Indiana Court of AppealsPanel:J. Bradford
J. Weissmann
J. DeBoer
Case No:25A-CT-941Lower Case:49D03-2303-CT-13118County:Marion