Preview
Filing # 189755513 E-Filed 01/15/2024 02:48:29 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY FLORIDA
ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, CASE NO: 2020 CA 002872 AN
Plaintiff,
vs.
ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ CHAVEZ,
and GRANNY’S GARDEN II, INC.,
Defendant.
/
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE AS TO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, by and through the
undersigned attorney and files this Motion in Limine and as grounds therefore states:
1. This action arises out of a crash that occurred on December 3, 2019.
2. Under the facts and circumstances of the subject collision, it is anticipated that the
Defendant(s) has/have or will admit negligence.
3. Historically, when this has occurred, Defendants have universally attempted to portray their
ultimate admission as a fiction to the jury, that negligence was admitted from the outset of
the claim. This is both false and extremely prejudicial, as well as inconsistent with the law
as shown herein.
4. When negligence is admitted, that issue is no longer for determination by the jury. That is
it. It is fundamentally unfair and unjust that a Defendant would receive “credit” for having
“admitted” an issue that for a substantial period of time was specifically denied and is
simply no longer an issue in the case.
5. The Defendants inevitably attempt to mislead the jury and misrepresent this “admission”
as having occurred from the outset of the case, when most often it has not occurred until
years after the lawsuit was filed, often not until just before trial. Accordingly, the
presumption that this admission as made from the outset is a false premise.
6. Even more, the false premise leads the jury to believe that “having admitted negligence,”
the Defendant is the “reasonable party,” and that the only reason that the jurors must give
up their valuable time to serve is due to an unreasonable Plaintiff regarding his/her demand
for money.
7. Even more, Florida Standard Jury Instruction 401.13 (c), specifically provides that under
these circumstances, the jury will be instructed:
The Court has determined and now instructs you that the Defendant was
negligent. The issue for you to decide on Plaintiff’s claim is whether such
negligence was a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage to Plaintiff.
8. Accordingly, the Defendant is not entitled to nor should receive any “credit” or
“legitimacy” by having ultimately admitted that which it specifically denied for months
and even years. It is simply no longer an issue in the case.
9. This Motion is being filed because inevitably once a Defendant ultimately admits
negligence, it vigorously and vehemently fights to put that admission before that jury. This
is not by accident.
10. The sole reason that the Defendant fights so hard to have this admission placed before the
jury is to obtain credibility that it does not deserve, all based on a false premise that is
unfair and obviously prejudicial.
11. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that any reference to a (late) admission of
negligence should be permitted in the Statement of the Case, as well as during the entire
2
trial, and the issue should be consistent with the Standard Jury Instruction on the issue,
which simply provides that the Defendant was negligent.
12. To allow otherwise is extremely unfair and prejudicial in that any reasonable juror who
hears that the Defendant has admitted negligence obviously assumes (because they are not
informed otherwise) that the admission of negligence was immediate, when in fact the
opposite is true, and there is no way for the Plaintiff to correct this unfair and unjust
misperception and misrepresentation.
13. Again, this Motion is being filed because it has universally become an issue where once
negligence is ultimately admitted, even if it is immediately prior to trial, the defense will
attempt to use that admission to mislead the jury into believing the Defendant merits both
unfair credibility and legitimacy, all of which is based on a false premise.
Therefore, Plaintiff respectfully requests an Order prohibiting the Defendant from ever stating,
claiming, representing, inferring or suggesting in any way that “negligence has been admitted,” as
it is simply not an issue in the case.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, respectfully prays this
Honorable Court to enter its Order consistent herewith.
[LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK]
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 15, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing with
the Clerk of the Courts by using the Florida Courts eFiling Portal. I further certify that Pursuant
to Rule 2.516(b)(1) I forwarded the foregoing this same day via email to: Scott Shelton, Esq. of
Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Scott.Shelton@csklegal.com; gary.lewis@csklegal.com;
Sandra.mcintosh@csklegal.com.
/s/ Melissa Alzate
Melissa Alzate, Esquire
FBN 1013530
Morgan & Morgan Orlando P.A.
198 Broadway Avenue
Kissimmee, Florida 34741
Telephone: (407) 452-1597
Facsimile: (407) 452-1623
Primary Email: MAlzate@forthepeople.com
Secondary Email: MCorianoLopez@forthepeople.com
Tertiary Email: VPagan@forthepeople.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
4
Preview
Filing # 189755513 E-Filed 01/15/2024 02:48:29 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY FLORIDA ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, CASE NO: 2020 CA 002872 AN Plaintiff, vs. ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ CHAVEZ, and GRANNY’S GARDEN II, INC., Defendant. / PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE AS TO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, by and through the undersigned attorney and files this Motion in Limine and as grounds therefore states: 1. This action arises out of a crash that occurred on December 3, 2019. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the subject collision, it is anticipated that the Defendant(s) has/have or will admit negligence. 3. Historically, when this has occurred, Defendants have universally attempted to portray their ultimate admission as a fiction to the jury, that negligence was admitted from the outset of the claim. This is both false and extremely prejudicial, as well as inconsistent with the law as shown herein. 4. When negligence is admitted, that issue is no longer for determination by the jury. That is it. It is fundamentally unfair and unjust that a Defendant would receive “credit” for having “admitted” an issue that for a substantial period of time was specifically denied and is simply no longer an issue in the case. 5. The Defendants inevitably attempt to mislead the jury and misrepresent this “admission” as having occurred from the outset of the case, when most often it has not occurred until years after the lawsuit was filed, often not until just before trial. Accordingly, the presumption that this admission as made from the outset is a false premise. 6. Even more, the false premise leads the jury to believe that “having admitted negligence,” the Defendant is the “reasonable party,” and that the only reason that the jurors must give up their valuable time to serve is due to an unreasonable Plaintiff regarding his/her demand for money. 7. Even more, Florida Standard Jury Instruction 401.13 (c), specifically provides that under these circumstances, the jury will be instructed: The Court has determined and now instructs you that the Defendant was negligent. The issue for you to decide on Plaintiff’s claim is whether such negligence was a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage to Plaintiff. 8. Accordingly, the Defendant is not entitled to nor should receive any “credit” or “legitimacy” by having ultimately admitted that which it specifically denied for months and even years. It is simply no longer an issue in the case. 9. This Motion is being filed because inevitably once a Defendant ultimately admits negligence, it vigorously and vehemently fights to put that admission before that jury. This is not by accident. 10. The sole reason that the Defendant fights so hard to have this admission placed before the jury is to obtain credibility that it does not deserve, all based on a false premise that is unfair and obviously prejudicial. 11. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that any reference to a (late) admission of negligence should be permitted in the Statement of the Case, as well as during the entire 2 trial, and the issue should be consistent with the Standard Jury Instruction on the issue, which simply provides that the Defendant was negligent. 12. To allow otherwise is extremely unfair and prejudicial in that any reasonable juror who hears that the Defendant has admitted negligence obviously assumes (because they are not informed otherwise) that the admission of negligence was immediate, when in fact the opposite is true, and there is no way for the Plaintiff to correct this unfair and unjust misperception and misrepresentation. 13. Again, this Motion is being filed because it has universally become an issue where once negligence is ultimately admitted, even if it is immediately prior to trial, the defense will attempt to use that admission to mislead the jury into believing the Defendant merits both unfair credibility and legitimacy, all of which is based on a false premise. Therefore, Plaintiff respectfully requests an Order prohibiting the Defendant from ever stating, claiming, representing, inferring or suggesting in any way that “negligence has been admitted,” as it is simply not an issue in the case. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, ASBEL ALEXANDER LLERENA, respectfully prays this Honorable Court to enter its Order consistent herewith. [LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on January 15, 2024, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Courts by using the Florida Courts eFiling Portal. I further certify that Pursuant to Rule 2.516(b)(1) I forwarded the foregoing this same day via email to: Scott Shelton, Esq. of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Scott.Shelton@csklegal.com; gary.lewis@csklegal.com; Sandra.mcintosh@csklegal.com. /s/ Melissa Alzate Melissa Alzate, Esquire FBN 1013530 Morgan & Morgan Orlando P.A. 198 Broadway Avenue Kissimmee, Florida 34741 Telephone: (407) 452-1597 Facsimile: (407) 452-1623 Primary Email: MAlzate@forthepeople.com Secondary Email: MCorianoLopez@forthepeople.com Tertiary Email: VPagan@forthepeople.com Attorney for Plaintiff 4