Social Media and Surveillance in Head Injury Claims

Quick answer

Social media posts, photos and surveillance video are frequently used in injury claims to argue that a person is less limited than they say. In federal lawsuits, discovery extends to “any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case,” and information “need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.”[1] Content that is relevant to a claimed injury can therefore be requested.

The scope of discovery

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1)

Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Information within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.

Source: [1]

Why head injury claims draw scrutiny

Head injury symptoms vary from day to day; HEADS UP notes they “may change during recovery.”[2] A single photo or video from a good day may be presented as evidence that the person is not limited. Most cognitive symptoms, such as trouble concentrating or memory problems,[3] are not visible in photos at all.

Social media

Posts and photos

Activities, travel and events after the injury.

Check-ins and tags

Location data and photos posted by others.

Messages

Private messages describing the injury or the person’s activities.

Pre-injury content

Posts showing what the person did before the injury.

Deleting relevant content can create separate legal problems. In federal court, Rule 37(e) applies when electronically stored information “that should have been preserved in the anticipation or conduct of litigation is lost because a party failed to take reasonable steps to preserve it.” A court may order measures to cure the prejudice, and if the party “acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation,” it may presume the information was unfavorable, instruct the jury accordingly, or dismiss the action.[4]

Surveillance

Surveillance video records what a person does in public, such as driving, shopping or yard work. Many concussion symptoms, such as trouble concentrating, irritability and sleep changes, are cognitive or emotional rather than physical,[3] so video of physical activity does not directly show them.

Consistency across sources

The other side typically compares social media, surveillance, medical records, testimony and exam results for inconsistencies. Records that accurately describe both good and bad days are harder to contradict. See everyday evidence.

Frequently asked questions

Can private social media posts be requested in a lawsuit?

Privacy settings do not determine whether content is discoverable. The federal rule covers any nonprivileged matter relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.[1]

Does surveillance show cognitive symptoms?

Generally no. Surveillance captures physical activity, while many concussion symptoms are cognitive or emotional.[3]

This page provides general information about the law from the sources listed below. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws vary by state and change over time. See our legal disclaimer.

Sources

  1. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_26
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HEADS UP. “Signs and Symptoms.” https://www.cdc.gov/heads-up/signs-symptoms/index.html
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Symptoms of Mild TBI and Concussion.” https://www.cdc.gov/traumatic-brain-injury/signs-symptoms/index.html
  4. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 37. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

Sources last checked: October 11, 2026