Preview
Filing# 182051792 E-Filed 09/18/2023 03:19:02 PM
THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH
IN
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
ETIENNE,
CASE NO. CACE-21-010707
Plaintiffs,
V
UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
i
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE RELATING TO
PLAINTIFF'S FINANCIAL CONDITION AND PRIOR INSURANCE CLAIMS
Plaintiffs,ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE ETIENNE , by and
(the "Plaintiff'),
through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to all applicableFlorida Rules of Civil Procedure,
requests the Court
respectfully to enter an Order grantingthis Motion in Limine excludingfrom
the admission into evidence and prohibitingDefendant, it's attorneys, and its witnesses, from
to, commenting on or alludingto, during the proceedings (includingpre-trial
testifying matters,
jury selection, arguments, trial testimony, and jury instructions and deliberations,or while
otherwise in the presence ofjurors,any of the following matters:
INTRODUCTION
This case involves an insurance claim resultingfrom tropicalstorm ETA. The Defendant
subsequentlydenied the claim due to an allegedpolicyexclusion under the subjectPolicy.There
is no questionthat the Plaintiff has an enforceable policyunder the subjectproperty. The specific
details of the case are documented throughout the pleadings.
[THIS PART OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
1
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 09/18/2023 03:19:02 PM.****
ARGUMENT
Judging from Defendant's discovery,it is reasonable to anticipate Defendant
that,at trial,
will try to divert attention from the issues in this case by focusingon the financial affairs and prior
unrelated claims of the Plaintiff made in the past. Because the Plaintiff' s finances and prior
unrelated insurance claims are irrelevant and immaterial to the instant case, the Court should bar
Defendant from offeringevidence relating
the Plaintiff's past insurance claims, particularly
any
claims which Defendant knows have resulted in payments being made and such
to the Plaintiff,
exclusion should apply to evidence relatingto the amounts that insurer might have paid the
Plaintiff in the past and how the Plaintiff might have spent those sums, unless the Plaintiff seeks
compensation for a specificitem alreadyfullyreimbursed by a priorclaim, which Plaintiff is not.
Such evidence of priorclaims as well as the Plaintiff's financial condition are not only irrelevant;
it is guaranteed to mislead and confuse the jury,unfairlyprejudicejurorsagainstthe
virtually
and unnecessarilyprolong and complicate the trial,thereby burdening
plaintiffs, this Court and
wastingjudicialresources. Defendant's goal in presentingsuch evidence, in fact,can only be to
mislead and prejudicethe jurors,and to divert their attention from the real issues in the case.
if the Court were
Alternatively, to deem such evidence relevant,the evidence still should
be excluded because the probativevalue of such evidence is outweighed by the
substantially
danger of unfair prejudice,confusion of the issues,or misleading the jury,or by considerations of
undue delay,waste of time, or needless presentationof cumulative evidence.
2
CONCLUSION AND PRAYER
The Plaintiff' s finances and its past insurance experiencesare not relevant to the issue in
this breach o f contract action. Consequently, evidence relatingto the Plaintiff's income, expenses,
assets, and liabilities should be excluded. For like reason, this Court should bar Defendant from
offeringevidence relating
to the any claims that
Plaintiff's past insurance claims, particularly do
not have any relationship
to the current loss. The exclusion should apply to evidence relatingto
the amounts that insurers might have paid to the Plaintiff in the past and how the Plaintiff might
have spent those sums.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs,ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE ETIENNE , respectfully
requests that this Honorable Court grant this Motion in Limine and prevent the introduction of
testimony and evidence referenced herein,along with any other relief this Court deems necessary,
justor proper.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoingwas furnished via electronic mail
to: Rafael Reyes, Esq., Universal Property and Casualty Insurance Company, 1110 West
Comrnerical Blvd.,, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309,
rr0308@universalproperty.com;vb0221@universalproperty.comiupciceservice01@universalprop
erty.com on September 18, 2023.
Respectfullysubmitted,
FELDMAN & LOPEZ, P.A.
9990 SW 77th Avenue
Miami, FL 33156
Phone: (305) 779-5904
3
By: Carolina Lopez
/s/
Carolina Lopez, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 1000488
service@feldmanandlopez.com
4
Preview
Filing# 182051792 E-Filed 09/18/2023 03:19:02 PM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH IN JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA ETIENNE, CASE NO. CACE-21-010707 Plaintiffs, V UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. i PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE RELATING TO PLAINTIFF'S FINANCIAL CONDITION AND PRIOR INSURANCE CLAIMS Plaintiffs,ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE ETIENNE , by and (the "Plaintiff'), through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to all applicableFlorida Rules of Civil Procedure, requests the Court respectfully to enter an Order grantingthis Motion in Limine excludingfrom the admission into evidence and prohibitingDefendant, it's attorneys, and its witnesses, from to, commenting on or alludingto, during the proceedings (includingpre-trial testifying matters, jury selection, arguments, trial testimony, and jury instructions and deliberations,or while otherwise in the presence ofjurors,any of the following matters: INTRODUCTION This case involves an insurance claim resultingfrom tropicalstorm ETA. The Defendant subsequentlydenied the claim due to an allegedpolicyexclusion under the subjectPolicy.There is no questionthat the Plaintiff has an enforceable policyunder the subjectproperty. The specific details of the case are documented throughout the pleadings. [THIS PART OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 1 *** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 09/18/2023 03:19:02 PM.**** ARGUMENT Judging from Defendant's discovery,it is reasonable to anticipate Defendant that,at trial, will try to divert attention from the issues in this case by focusingon the financial affairs and prior unrelated claims of the Plaintiff made in the past. Because the Plaintiff' s finances and prior unrelated insurance claims are irrelevant and immaterial to the instant case, the Court should bar Defendant from offeringevidence relating the Plaintiff's past insurance claims, particularly any claims which Defendant knows have resulted in payments being made and such to the Plaintiff, exclusion should apply to evidence relatingto the amounts that insurer might have paid the Plaintiff in the past and how the Plaintiff might have spent those sums, unless the Plaintiff seeks compensation for a specificitem alreadyfullyreimbursed by a priorclaim, which Plaintiff is not. Such evidence of priorclaims as well as the Plaintiff's financial condition are not only irrelevant; it is guaranteed to mislead and confuse the jury,unfairlyprejudicejurorsagainstthe virtually and unnecessarilyprolong and complicate the trial,thereby burdening plaintiffs, this Court and wastingjudicialresources. Defendant's goal in presentingsuch evidence, in fact,can only be to mislead and prejudicethe jurors,and to divert their attention from the real issues in the case. if the Court were Alternatively, to deem such evidence relevant,the evidence still should be excluded because the probativevalue of such evidence is outweighed by the substantially danger of unfair prejudice,confusion of the issues,or misleading the jury,or by considerations of undue delay,waste of time, or needless presentationof cumulative evidence. 2 CONCLUSION AND PRAYER The Plaintiff' s finances and its past insurance experiencesare not relevant to the issue in this breach o f contract action. Consequently, evidence relatingto the Plaintiff's income, expenses, assets, and liabilities should be excluded. For like reason, this Court should bar Defendant from offeringevidence relating to the any claims that Plaintiff's past insurance claims, particularly do not have any relationship to the current loss. The exclusion should apply to evidence relatingto the amounts that insurers might have paid to the Plaintiff in the past and how the Plaintiff might have spent those sums. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs,ELORS ETIENNE AND ADJANIE ETIENNE , respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant this Motion in Limine and prevent the introduction of testimony and evidence referenced herein,along with any other relief this Court deems necessary, justor proper. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of the foregoingwas furnished via electronic mail to: Rafael Reyes, Esq., Universal Property and Casualty Insurance Company, 1110 West Comrnerical Blvd.,, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309, rr0308@universalproperty.com;vb0221@universalproperty.comiupciceservice01@universalprop erty.com on September 18, 2023. Respectfullysubmitted, FELDMAN & LOPEZ, P.A. 9990 SW 77th Avenue Miami, FL 33156 Phone: (305) 779-5904 3 By: Carolina Lopez /s/ Carolina Lopez, Esq. Florida Bar No. 1000488 service@feldmanandlopez.com 4