Megan Beth Stokesberry

I interacted with Megan Stokesberry while she served as corporate counsel for LA Fitness during the pre-suit phase of my pending civil dispute. In January 2023, Ms. Stokesberry wrote to my attorneys that she had been waiting for HR and IT to provide phone records and surveillance video. In the sam...e correspondence, she stated that LA Fitness’s surveillance confirmed part of the events surrounding my check-in. My attorneys requested the referenced footage. It was not provided before litigation, and the facility surveillance footage was later not produced in discovery. My counsel subsequently filed a motion seeking spoliation-related relief based on the footage’s prior existence, its relevance, and LA Fitness’s later position that it was no longer in its possession. My concern is that corporate counsel expressly relied upon surveillance footage when responding to my claim, while the footage itself was never made available for independent examination during the litigation. That prevented me, my attorneys, and ultimately the court from comparing the company’s characterization of the footage with the recording itself. This experience reinforced the importance of preserving written representations, promptly requesting any evidence referenced by corporate counsel, and independently verifying statements concerning objective evidence. Based on my experience, I found Ms. Stokesberry’s written demand-letter response unreliable and ultimately without meaningful evidentiary value. It relied upon surveillance footage to support LA Fitness’s position, yet that evidence was never produced for independent review, leaving the factual assertions in her correspondence unverified by the underlying evidence. If the evidence proves your story, why not produce it and let the facts speak for themselves?