There have been court rulings specifying when a motion "to exclude" is at issue. e.g.,
The motion to exclude is applicable to many kinds of evidence. For example, motions to exclude:
Relevant to a motion to exclude evidence is OCB’s response or lack thereof to the Church’s discovery and the affect it has on the Church, such as depriving the Church of the opportunity of preparation or causing unfair surprise at trial. (Thoren v. Johnston & Washer, supra, 29 Cal.App.3d at 274.) Presumably, OCB propounded its discovery to show that the Church was not affected because the Church already had the amended bylaws that it sought.
Sep 16, 2020
Real Property
other
Los Angeles County, CA
MOTION TO EXCLUDE TESTIMONY AT TRIAL (Cal. Evid. Code § 402, 701, 702) TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant SAB Investment Property, LLC’s Motion to Exclude Plaintiff’s Testimony at Trial is DENIED. ANALYSIS: Plaintiff Egal Shahbaz (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for discrimination on the basis of disability against Defendant SAB Investment Property, LLC (“Defendant”) on October 30, 2018. Defendant filed the instant Motion to Exclude Plaintiff’s Testimony at Trial on May 22, 2020.
Sep 15, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
(Ford filed a third motion to exclude evidence but has since filed a Notice of Withdrawal of that motion. Thus, the motion to exclude was dropped.) As to the Motion to Seal, Plaintiff opposes on the grounds the motion is untimely under Rule of Court 2.551(b)(3) and the Court lacks discretion to consider an untimely motion.
Aug 26, 2020
Jennifer V
Sonoma County, CA
Consequently, a motion to exclude expert testimony is premature given the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure, sections 2034.610 & 2034.710. Plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice. Conclusion Plaintiff’s motion to exclude Defendant from offering expert witness testimony is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff is to give notice.
Aug 17, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
The ALJ dismissed Marshall’s motion to exclude Fosmire’s medical records, strike Olson’s testimony, and dismiss the first three causes of discipline. The ALJ decided that Marshall did not have standing to assert Fosmire’s privacy rights and alternatively did not establish that Fosmire’s privacy rights were violated. AR 2128-27. On the standing issue, the ALJ cited the California Supreme Court case of Lewis v.
Jul 21, 2020
Administrative
Writ
Los Angeles County, CA
1) Petitioners' Motion and Memorandum to Exclude Four Supplemental Administrative Record Documents, or in the Alternative, Request for Limited 1/2 Day Deposition of Nick Amini of Regional Board and Request for Record Subpoena 2) Status Conference MOTION TO EXCLUDE DOCUMENTS Petitioners Edwards Lifesciences LLC and Baxter International, Inc. move to exclude documents from the administrative record.
Jul 10, 2020
Orange County, CA
As such, the Court will take the matter (ROA 654) off calendar. (2) Motion to Exclude Evidence, or, in the Alternative, to Compel Plaintiff’s Compliance with the Demand for Inspection of Documents is denied. The inspection demand appears untimely when made. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2031.030, subd. (c)(2), 2016.050, 1013, subd. (a).)
Jul 07, 2020
Orange County, CA
Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony filed by Defendant Kalisitiane Langi Kupu OFF CALENDAR. REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FILED 07/15/2020. Future Hearings: No future hearings
Jul 01, 2020
Orange County, CA
ORDER RE CONTINUANCE Due to governmental declarations of a state of emergency, the hearing on the motion to exclude non-disclosed evidence is continued to April 21, 2020 at 1:30 pm. The final status conference set for April 1, 2020 and trial set for April 15, 2020 are vacated. A trial setting conference is set for May 14, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. Moving party is to give notice.
Mar 20, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
“The granting or denying of a motion to secure a supplemental bill of particulars and a motion to exclude evidence are largely within the discretion of the trial court. (Glogau v. Hagan, 107 Cal.App.2d 313, 321, 237 P.2d 329; Silva v. Bair, 141 Cal. 599, 602, 75 P. 162; McCarthy v. Mt. Tecarte Land & Water Co., supra, 110 Cal. 687, 693, 43 P. 391.)” (Meredith v. Marks (1963) 212 Cal.App.2d 265, 270.)
Mar 06, 2020
El Dorado County, CA
Conclusion and Order Defendants’ motion to exclude Plaintiff’s newly designated expert witnesses is granted. Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: March 5, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court
Mar 05, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
CONCLUSION AND ORDER Defendants’ motion to exclude Dr. Gross as a witness at trial is denied. Defendants’ request for sanctions is denied. Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: February 21, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court
Feb 21, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
First, Defendant City files the present motion to exclude evidence of lost goodwill because it was not raised in the Answer to the City's condemnation complaint. However, the present action proceeding to trial is Plaintiffs' complaint for inverse condemnation, which clearly sets forth goodwill damages. Further, as goodwill damages are permitted under CCP '1263.510(a), the Court denies the request to exclude goodwill damages on this bases.
Feb 19, 2020
Dept. 6
Nevada County, CA
Defendant's request that Plaintiff not be allowed to testify at trial is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; however, if Plaintiff fails to comply with the Court's order directing him to appear at a deposition within twenty (20) days, Defendant may renew the Motion to exclude Plaintiff from testifying at trial. Plaintiff's failure to appear at a deposition and produce the requested documents was without substantial justification.
Feb 18, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
Fraud
San Diego County, CA
Defendant's request that Plaintiff not be allowed to testify at trial is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; however, if Plaintiff fails to comply with the Court's order directing him to appear at a deposition within twenty (20) days, Defendant may renew the Motion to exclude Plaintiff from testifying at trial. Plaintiff's failure to appear at a deposition and produce the requested documents was without substantial justification.
Feb 18, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
Fraud
San Diego County, CA
The Court will hear from the parties as to their availability and set hearing dates for Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Expert and Defendants’ Motion to Summary Judgment/Adjudication. Defendants to give notice. (3) Motion for Leave to Withdraw Plaintiff’s Responses to J Star Auto Group, Inc.’s Request for Admissions by Plaintiff Tirso Gamo is CONTINUED to _____ 2020, Dept. C11, at 2 pm.
Feb 18, 2020
Orange County, CA
Defense counsel declared that when she contacted plaintiff’s counsel to inquire about an opposition to defendant’s motion to exclude evidence about the seven day notice to perform or quit, she was advised on November 14, 2019 that plaintiff had dismissed the action; plaintiff’s counsel did not send her a copy of the request for dismissal, but counsel said he would send a conformed copy when he got it back from court. (Initial Declaration of Defense Counsel in Support of Motion, paragraph 5.)
Feb 14, 2020
El Dorado County, CA
TENTATIVE RULINGS ON PLAINTIFF’S IN LIMINE MOTIONS Plaintiff’s No. 2 – Motion To exclude Evidence of Gambling or Tax Returns Allow use of tax returns redacted to exclude all evidence of income other than plaintiff’s earnings from driving. Other income sources are not relevant. Mention of gambling is irrelevant and prejudicial. Plaintiff’s No. 4 – Motion to exclude Expert Opinion of Fatzinger Hearing required. No Opposition was filed.
Feb 04, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
CONCLUSION AND ORDER The Court grants Defendants’ motion to exclude Michael Dogali, M.D., Fred Kyt, M.D., and Karen Luckett from testifying at trial. Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: January 10, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court
Jan 10, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
Medical Malpractice
Los Angeles County, CA
NAM’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE PLAINTIFF’ EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY DEFENDANTS NEW STAR REALTY, INC. AND JENNY S. NAM’S MOTION TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AND PRODUCTION AT DEPOSITION Factual Background This is a negligence action.
Jan 07, 2020
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
Los Angeles County, CA
Tentative rulings rate: motions in limine Plaintiffs motion to: Exclude unrelated medical conditions: grant in part, gynecological treatment will not be admitted, some evidence of psychological treatment may be admitted. 4. Admit evidence of changes to pool: deny 7. Exclude testimony of Morse: deny 8. Exclude evidence that was subject of subpoena quashed by court: deny 9. Exclude testimony of Albert Stone: deny 11. Exclude testimony regarding additional testing by Loud: deny 12.
Jan 06, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
.: BC665885 Hearing Date: December 11, 2019 [TENTATIVE] order RE: Motion to exclude plaintiff’s Designated Expert Defendants Hakob Babajanyan and TLA Limousine, Inc. (“Defendants”) move to preclude Plaintiff Kathy Pauline Morris (“Plaintiff”) from calling her expert Hyman Gross, M.D. (“Gross”) as a witness at trial. Trial is set for March 3, 2019. Therefore, the Court continues the hearing on this motion to the date of the final status conference: February 14, 2020, at 10:00 a.m.
Dec 11, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
The motion to exclude is denied as to driving convictions that occurred before the date Mr. Turner was hired. b. The motion is granted as to any evidence of arrests without convictions. The evidence is not relevant as it does not relate to driving ability. The admission of such evidence also could arguably be viewed as being against public policy as the threat of having to refute such evidence would encourage potential employers to simply avoid any risk by not hiring a person with a prior conviction.
Dec 04, 2019
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Sacramento County, CA
Notably, Staub was decided in connection with a motion to exclude, not a motion for leave to make a late designation. However, the motion to exclude was made on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to make a timely designation (the plaintiff’s designation was due on 12/27/11, but was made on 1/09/12). Thus, the analysis appears to be applicable to this case.
Dec 02, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Defendant Concord Servicing Corporation's Motion to Exclude Testimony of Plaintiff's Designated Medical Experts or Medical Evidence is GRANTED. (ROA 458.) Expert testimony regarding Plaintiff's medical condition is not relevant to any of Plaintiff' causes of action in this case. Defendant's motion is a motion in limine. "Unless otherwise directed by the court, counsel must file and serve motions in limine and opposition thereto five court days and two court days respectively prior to trial call."
Nov 07, 2019
Contract
Breach
San Diego County, CA
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
