Legal Definitions - sham affidavit

A sham affidavit refers to a sworn written statement (an affidavit) submitted in a legal case that directly contradicts the same person's prior sworn testimony, such as testimony given during a deposition, without a credible explanation for the change. Courts generally disregard such affidavits because they are often viewed as an attempt to create a false factual dispute to prevent a judge from making a decision based on the existing evidence, particularly to avoid a summary judgment.

Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

• Personal Injury Lawsuit: Imagine a driver involved in a car accident who testifies under oath during a deposition that they were looking straight ahead at the time of impact. Later, when the opposing party files a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the driver's inattention caused the accident, the driver submits a new affidavit. In this affidavit, the driver now states that they were actually checking their blind spot, hoping to introduce a new explanation for their actions and create a factual dispute that would prevent the judge from ruling against them. If there's no plausible reason for this sudden change in testimony, a court would likely consider this a sham affidavit and disregard it.

• Contract Dispute: Consider a business owner being sued for breach of contract. During a deposition, the owner testifies under oath that they never received a specific delivery of goods crucial to the contract. However, when the plaintiff moves for summary judgment, presenting evidence that the goods were indeed delivered, the owner then submits an affidavit claiming they *did* receive the goods but immediately returned them due to a defect. If this new claim directly contradicts their earlier sworn statement without any new evidence or a compelling reason for the change, a court would likely identify it as a sham affidavit and refuse to consider it as valid evidence.

• Employment Discrimination Case: An employee sues their former employer for discrimination. In their initial sworn deposition, the employee states that their supervisor never made any direct discriminatory comments. After the employer files a motion for summary judgment, arguing there's no evidence of discriminatory remarks, the employee submits an affidavit. In this new affidavit, the employee now claims that the supervisor made several specific, overtly discriminatory statements on multiple occasions. If this sudden and significant change in testimony lacks any reasonable explanation (such as newly discovered evidence or a genuine memory recall), a court would likely deem it a sham affidavit and disregard the new claims, potentially leading to the dismissal of the discrimination claim.