Joe Gibbs Racing is demanding that the court permit a jury to presume that deleted text‑messages with Spire owner Jeffrey Dickerson contained confidential material and is seeking sanctions against former coach Chris Gabehart for removing those exchanges.
JGR’s “Adverse Inference” Motion
The NASCAR team’s filing asks the judge to allow the upcoming February jury to adopt an adverse inference claim. In that scenario, the jury would be instructed to infer that the missing texts were deleted to conceal evidence potentially harmful to JGR.
The Deletion Timeline
Gabehart’s phone log shows a seven‑message thread deleted on November 15, after the carrier had set automatic removal to occur every 30 days. The removed messages began with a discussion of an employment understanding and concluded with an offer from Spire to hire Gabehart as chief motorsports officer.
Discovery Roadblocks
JGR initially sought the texts through the discovery process but received no returns from the carriers of either Gabehart or Dickerson. Consequently, the team grounds its adverse inference request on the absence of evidence that might explain the deletions.
Gabehart’s Defense
In deposition statements and his own forensic report, Gabehart claims the deleted texts were ordinary messages—no multimedia content—which he removed because he felt uneasy about accepting an offer while negotiating his exit from JGR.
Trade‑Secret Allegations
Investigations of Gabehart’s devices, handed over after the dismissal of his contract, revealed photographs of proprietary materials and files stored on personal drives. Gabehart asserts that all such materials were later returned to JGR or eliminated after discovery.
Timing of Preservation Obligations
JGR’s legal counsel argues that a duty to preserve evidence began when Gabehart photographed his JGR workstation on November 7, indicating foreseen litigation. Gabehart counters that the obligation only arises from reasonably foreseeable disputes, not from conduct that later proves wrongful.
Cease‑and‑Desist Letter
JGR issued a cease and desist and preservation notice on December 15, a month after the texts were removed. The team maintains that Dickerson should have expected litigation soon after the unauthorized removal of confidential data.
Spire’s Counter‑Position
Spire’s complaint asserts that message deletion resulted solely from Dickerson’s automatic feature, not from any action by Gabehart. The firm warns that an adverse inference directed at Gabehart could unfairly prejudice the jury against Spire as well.
Pre‑Trial Timing Concerns
Spire argues it is premature to decide on an adverse inference at this point, noting that over three months remain until trial and that their own claims lack evidence of JGR information being shared with Spire before Gabehart’s employment began.
Sanctions and Future Proceedings
JGR seeks sanctions for claiming that Gabehart deleted material subject to discovery, alleging he failed to preserve documents upon suspecting a lawsuit. Gabehart, however, maintains that the carrier confirmed the messages were text‑only and provides forensic evidence supporting his timeline for deletion.
Implications for Trade‑Secret Claims
The dispute also centers on whether JGR can prove Spire’s use of trade secrets in Gabehart’s subsequent role. No definitive proof has emerged, and the parties have yet to reconcile what constitutes a trade secret.
Judicial Guidance and Upcoming Trial
Both sides request that the judge refrain from ordering adverse inference instructions until more complete records are available, arguing that the jury will then have a full context for evaluating any inferences.
Looking Ahead
With the trial still months away, the court’s decision on the admissibility of an adverse inference will shape the foundation of JGR’s claims against both Gabehart and Spire as the legal proceedings move toward the February court date.
"