mean that invalidation of the theory early on would not have been helpful to the claimants. 11 . It is of course speculative as to what the results of testing would have been, "[b]ut therein lies the prejudice — [the claimant] was denied any opportunity to find out one way or the other.” Marrocco v. Gen. Motors Corp., 966 F.2d 220, 223 (7th Cir.1992) (rejecting the argument that prejudice was speculative because the defendant could not prove that examination of physical evidence would have aided its cause); see also Oleksy v. Gen. Elec. Co., No. 06 C 1245, 2013 WL 3944174, at *9-10. (N.D.Ill. July 31, 2013) (applying Marrocco to impose sanctions against the defendant based on failure to preserve evidence). 12 .Compare, e.g., United States v. Esposito, 771 F.2d 283, 286 (7th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>), with Marrocco, 966 F.2d at 224 (affirming the
holding that a finding of plaintiffs bad faith is not a prerequisite to the trial courts exercise of discretion to award fees holding that improper motive is element of bad faith holding title company liable for bad faith holding that a bad faith claim is a tort holding that a finding of bad faith is necessary to invoke the spoliation doctrine