On April 10, 2014 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Garcia, Phillip,
and
Carrie Wilson, In Her Capacitcy As Trustee Of The,
Does 1 To 20,
Markham, Erika,
Markham, Shaun,
Markham, Shawn,
Wilson, Angelo,
Wilson, Carrie,
for civil
in the District Court of San Francisco County.
Preview
nD
ELECTRONICALLY
FILED
Superior Court of California,
LAW OFFICES OF BENNY MARTIN County of San Francisco
Benjamin Martin (SBN 257452) 08/07/2017
657 Santa Clara Ave. Clerk of the Court
Venice CA, 90291 BY:RONNIE OTERO
Deputy Clerk
Phone: (510) 227-4406
Email: knowyourightsinsf@ gmail.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Phillip Garcia
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
PHILLIP GARCIA, an individual, } Case No. CGC-14-538560
Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S
) MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO
: ) PRECLUDE QUESTIONING
Ns: ) PLAINTIFF ON WHY PLAINTIFF
) DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS
ANGELO WILSON, an individual, et. al. } TO THE PREMISES
)
)
Defendants. 3
)
Plaintiff will be presenting evidence of conditions at the premises that persisted as a result of
Defendants refusal to address Plaintiff's complaints. Plaintiff anticipates that Defendants will
attempt to cross-examine Plaintiff on why he did not undertake repairs himself when Defendants
refused to address his complaints. However, such questioning is totally irrelevant and has no
probative value because a tenant has no obligation to correct defective conditions of leased premises.
Glenn R. Sewell Sheet Metal, Inc. v. Loverde (1969) 70 Cal.2d 666, 671; /-6 MB Practice Guide: CA
Landlord-Tenant Litigation 6.11 (2016). Accordingly, the prejudice and undue consumption of time
before the jury significantly outweighs the probative value of Defendants’ attempt to elicit such
testimony from Plaintiff. Evid. Code §§ 350,352.
Ill. CONCLUSION.
For the reasons above-stated, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grant Plaintiff's
Motion in Limine #12.
Loe
PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO PRECLUDE QUESTIONING PLAINTIFF ON
WHY PLAINTIFF DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS TO THE PREMISESnD
DATE: April 7, 2017
PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO PRECLUDE QUESTIONING PLAINTIFF ON
WHY PLAINTIFF DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS TO THE PREMISES
LAW OFFICES OF BENNY MARTIN
Benny Martin, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
2-
Document Filed Date
August 07, 2017
Case Filing Date
April 10, 2014
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
nD ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, LAW OFFICES OF BENNY MARTIN County of San Francisco Benjamin Martin (SBN 257452) 08/07/2017 657 Santa Clara Ave. Clerk of the Court Venice CA, 90291 BY:RONNIE OTERO Deputy Clerk Phone: (510) 227-4406 Email: knowyourightsinsf@ gmail.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Phillip Garcia SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO UNLIMITED JURISDICTION PHILLIP GARCIA, an individual, } Case No. CGC-14-538560 Plaintiff, ) PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S ) MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO : ) PRECLUDE QUESTIONING Ns: ) PLAINTIFF ON WHY PLAINTIFF ) DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS ANGELO WILSON, an individual, et. al. } TO THE PREMISES ) ) Defendants. 3 ) Plaintiff will be presenting evidence of conditions at the premises that persisted as a result of Defendants refusal to address Plaintiff's complaints. Plaintiff anticipates that Defendants will attempt to cross-examine Plaintiff on why he did not undertake repairs himself when Defendants refused to address his complaints. However, such questioning is totally irrelevant and has no probative value because a tenant has no obligation to correct defective conditions of leased premises. Glenn R. Sewell Sheet Metal, Inc. v. Loverde (1969) 70 Cal.2d 666, 671; /-6 MB Practice Guide: CA Landlord-Tenant Litigation 6.11 (2016). Accordingly, the prejudice and undue consumption of time before the jury significantly outweighs the probative value of Defendants’ attempt to elicit such testimony from Plaintiff. Evid. Code §§ 350,352. Ill. CONCLUSION. For the reasons above-stated, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court grant Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #12. Loe PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO PRECLUDE QUESTIONING PLAINTIFF ON WHY PLAINTIFF DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS TO THE PREMISESnD DATE: April 7, 2017 PLAINTIFF PHILLIP GARCIA’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 12: TO PRECLUDE QUESTIONING PLAINTIFF ON WHY PLAINTIFF DID NOT MAKE HIS OWN REPAIRS TO THE PREMISES LAW OFFICES OF BENNY MARTIN Benny Martin, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff 2-