arrow left
arrow right
  • ELVIA JIMENEZ VS FLORA CABALLERO ET AL Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • ELVIA JIMENEZ VS FLORA CABALLERO ET AL Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

pO @ @ a‘ Ara O. Seropian, Esq., (State Bar No: 221799) RAFFALOW, RHOADS, BRETOI Attorneys at Law 4484 Wilshire Boulevard, Second Floor Los Angeles, California 90010 Superior Court gf California (323) 857-7175 ounty of Los Angeles Attorney for Defendants, OCT 07 2016 Flora Caballero and Carlos Caballero Sh eri 2 Carter, o tive Officer/Clerk B Deputy Our File No.: 15-56456-59 Raut Sanchez SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 ELVIA SIMENEZ, an Individual, CASE NO: BC579516 12 Plaintiff, 13 OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S vs. MOTION IN LIMINE #8 EXCLUDING 14 EVIDENCE OF REFERRAL BY FLORA CABALLERO, an Individual; CARLOS ATTORNEY TO ANY MEDICAL 15 CABALLERO, an Individual; and DOES 1 to 50, DOCTOR AT TRIAL Inclusive,, et al., 16 Date: 10/24/16 Defendants. Time 8:30am. 17 Dept: 97 18 Defendants opposes Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #8 for an order excluding evidence of referral by 19 attorney tc any Medical Doctor at trial because it is relevant to show that the Plaintiff retained an attorney 20 prior to seeking medical attention and also calls into question the credibility of plaintiffs claims along with 21 plaintiff's motive of for seeking medical treatment (financial vs. health). The referral is also relevant as to 22 the bias of the doctor's expert testimony. 23 The treating doctor/chiropractor has an economic interest in the outcome of this trial and his pe SD 24he -opinions, whether written or verbal, regarding Plaintiff's medical treatment is tainted to the outcome of this he 25 trial. The evidence of referral by Plaintiff attorney is also relevant as to Plaintiff's damages and the RD <> -possibility ofacohesion work up between Plaintiffs, their attorney, and their doctor(s) regarding the extent cn > D 27 1 28 OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE EXCLUDING EVIDENCE OF REFERRAL BY ATTORNEY TO MEDICAL DOCTOR