Can Walmart delete or overwrite surveillance video after a slip-and-fall in Texas?

A customer asks for the store video and is told it is no longer available. Before treating that answer as proof of spoliation, find out what “no longer available” means. Was nothing recorded? Was a recording overwritten? Was a clip saved somewhere else? Does the person answering know?

Those are different situations. The Walmart knowledge hub explains the underlying injury claim; this article concerns the separate problem of lost evidence.

Why the Aldridge decision matters

In Brookshire Brothers, Ltd. v. Aldridge, 438 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. 2014), a grocery store retained a short recording of a customer's fall but did not preserve a longer period of footage. The Supreme Court used the case to explain how Texas courts should decide spoliation questions.

The judge decides whether evidence was improperly lost and what to do about it. A missing recording does not carry an automatic presumption against the store.

For a jury instruction on spoliation, Aldridge generally requires intentional destruction. Its narrow negligence exception concerns a loss so damaging that a party can no longer meaningfully present a claim or defense.

What could trigger a duty to preserve?

The facts known to the store matter. Under Aldridge, the inquiry includes whether a party knew or reasonably should have known there was a substantial chance of a claim and that the evidence would be material and relevant to it. A lawyer must apply that standard to the actual circumstances.

A detailed preservation request can help establish what was brought to the recipient's attention. Keep the request and delivery information. But do not assume that a duty can arise only after a letter, or that sending a broad letter proves every requested item had to be retained.

Put the overwrite date alongside the incident report, claim notice and letter-delivery dates. Leave a blank for any date the records do not establish.

Establish the recording's history

Start with camera coverage. A ceiling camera near the aisle may face somewhere else. A person familiar with the system can explain what it recorded, its retention settings and how exports were made. Do not assign a universal retention period to Walmart; the relevant system and circumstances need to be established.

Next, identify saved copies. A short clip may have been exported for an incident report, an insurer or counsel, even if the source recording later disappeared. Ask who selected the clip and its start and end points. Earlier footage can matter to constructive notice, so a recording of the fall alone may leave an important gap.

Keep file names, transmission messages and available export information. If a copy has been converted, find out what changed. A missing timestamp on a copy is not necessarily a missing timestamp in the source.

What question can no longer be answered?

Identify the missing event on the timeline: the spill appearing, an inspection, or a cone being placed. Then check the surviving cameras and witnesses. If they supply the same information, that bears on how much harm the loss caused.

A saved clip might show the fall but nothing of the previous hour. Describe that gap as a gap. Nobody can honestly say what the unseen hour would have proved.

Keep the response and the remaining evidence

“We will not release it” does not mean “we deleted it.” Save the actual response for counsel. While the video issue is investigated, keep photographs, witness contacts and inspection records. Those may support the injury claim even without a recording.

For the broader litigation process, read How to Litigate a Walmart Injury Case in Texas.

This is general information about Texas law, not advice for a particular case. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Deadlines, available evidence and the applicable legal duties depend on the facts.