On January 24, 2020 a
Opposition to Motion in Limine Filed Electronically - Def Opposition to Motion in Limine NO. TWO
was filed
involving a dispute between
Williams, Barbara,
and
Maldonado, Mariclare,
Wilson, Troy,
for Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
_________________________________
1 McClaugherty & Associates ELECTRONICALLY FILED (Auto)
Jay S. MeClaugherty (State Bar No. 99063) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
2 Email: jay.mcc1augherty(mcctria1s.com COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Hayden T. Traver (State Bar No. 317428) 12/6/2023 3:47 PM
3 Email: hayden.traver@rncctrials.com
222 East Huntington Drive, Suite 230
4 Monrovia, California 91016
Telephone: (626) 821-1100
5 Fax: (626) 821-2626
6 Attorneys for Defendants
TROY WILSON and MARICLARE MALDONADO
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO - CENTRAL DISTRICT
10
11 BARBARA WILLIAMS, an individual, Case No.: C1VDS2002655
[Unlimited Jurisdiction]
12 Plaintiff,
DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO
13 v. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. TWO
14 TROY WILSON; MARICLARE Trial:
MALDONADO; and DOES 1 through 100, Date: December 11, 2023
15 Inclusive, Time: 10:00 a.m.
Dept.: S37
16 Defendants.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION ThJ LIMINE NO. 2
1 I.
2 ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES
3 A. Defendants are Permitted to Introduce Evidence that Plaintiff Was Referred to
4 Medical Treatment by her Attorney and Received Treatment on a Lien
5 “[Rleferral evidence [is] relevant to the question of the reasonable value of the lien-
6 physicians’ medical care because it may show bias or financial incentives on the part of the lien-
7 physicians.” Qaadir v. Figueroa (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 790. “If the lien-physician wants future
8 referrals from a lawyer and understands that the lawyer benefits from inflating a client’s medical
9 bills, that incentive might encourage the lien-physician to inflate its current bill to please the
10 lawyer and win future referrals.” Id.
11 The California Court of Appeals in Qaadir v. Figueroa made it very clear that defense
12 attorneys may introduce evidence that a plaintiff was referred to medical care by his or her
13 attorney and that a plaintiff received medical treatment on a lien. The California Court of
14 Appeals acknowledges the relevance of this evidence at trial. Qaadir v. Figueroa is the
15 controlling case law on this subject. The Court should permit Defendant TROY WILSON and
16 MARICLARE MALDONADO (collectively, “Defendants”) to introduce evidence that Plaintiff
17 BARBARA WILLIAMS (“Plaintiff’) was referred to medical treatment by her doctor, and
18 received treatment on a lien, pursuant to the holding of Qaadir v. Figueroa.
19 II.
20 CONCLUSION
21 Defendant respectfully requests that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 2.
22
23 DATED: December 6, 2023 MCCLAUGHERTY & ASSOCIATES
24
25 By:
Hayden T. yver
26 Attorney for Defendants
TROY WILSON and
27 MARICLARE MALDONADO
28
-2-
DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE NO 2
Document Filed Date
December 06, 2023
Case Filing Date
January 24, 2020
Category
Personal Injury Motor Vehicle Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
_________________________________ 1 McClaugherty & Associates ELECTRONICALLY FILED (Auto) Jay S. MeClaugherty (State Bar No. 99063) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 Email: jay.mcc1augherty(mcctria1s.com COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Hayden T. Traver (State Bar No. 317428) 12/6/2023 3:47 PM 3 Email: hayden.traver@rncctrials.com 222 East Huntington Drive, Suite 230 4 Monrovia, California 91016 Telephone: (626) 821-1100 5 Fax: (626) 821-2626 6 Attorneys for Defendants TROY WILSON and MARICLARE MALDONADO 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO - CENTRAL DISTRICT 10 11 BARBARA WILLIAMS, an individual, Case No.: C1VDS2002655 [Unlimited Jurisdiction] 12 Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO 13 v. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. TWO 14 TROY WILSON; MARICLARE Trial: MALDONADO; and DOES 1 through 100, Date: December 11, 2023 15 Inclusive, Time: 10:00 a.m. Dept.: S37 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION ThJ LIMINE NO. 2 1 I. 2 ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES 3 A. Defendants are Permitted to Introduce Evidence that Plaintiff Was Referred to 4 Medical Treatment by her Attorney and Received Treatment on a Lien 5 “[Rleferral evidence [is] relevant to the question of the reasonable value of the lien- 6 physicians’ medical care because it may show bias or financial incentives on the part of the lien- 7 physicians.” Qaadir v. Figueroa (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 790. “If the lien-physician wants future 8 referrals from a lawyer and understands that the lawyer benefits from inflating a client’s medical 9 bills, that incentive might encourage the lien-physician to inflate its current bill to please the 10 lawyer and win future referrals.” Id. 11 The California Court of Appeals in Qaadir v. Figueroa made it very clear that defense 12 attorneys may introduce evidence that a plaintiff was referred to medical care by his or her 13 attorney and that a plaintiff received medical treatment on a lien. The California Court of 14 Appeals acknowledges the relevance of this evidence at trial. Qaadir v. Figueroa is the 15 controlling case law on this subject. The Court should permit Defendant TROY WILSON and 16 MARICLARE MALDONADO (collectively, “Defendants”) to introduce evidence that Plaintiff 17 BARBARA WILLIAMS (“Plaintiff’) was referred to medical treatment by her doctor, and 18 received treatment on a lien, pursuant to the holding of Qaadir v. Figueroa. 19 II. 20 CONCLUSION 21 Defendant respectfully requests that the Court deny Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 2. 22 23 DATED: December 6, 2023 MCCLAUGHERTY & ASSOCIATES 24 25 By: Hayden T. yver 26 Attorney for Defendants TROY WILSON and 27 MARICLARE MALDONADO 28 -2- DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE NO 2