arrow left
arrow right
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                aD nw

BRYDON

Huo & PARKER,
138 MatW STREET
20" FLoor
Su Feamelseu, CA 94105

Edward R. Hugo [Bar No. 124839]
James C. Parker [Bar No. 106149]

Shelley K. Tinkotf [Bar No. 187498]
BRYDON HUGO & PARKER ELECTRONICALLY
135 Main Street, 20% Floor FILED
San Francisco, CA 94105 Superior Court of California,
Telephone: (415) 808-0300 County of San Francisco
Facsimile: (415) 808-0333 OCT 01 2010
Email: tinkoff@bhplaw.com Clerk of the Court
BY: JUANITA D. MURPHY
Attorneys for Defendant Deputy Clerk

FOSTER WHEELER LLC

SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

LOUIS CASTAGNA, (ASBESTOS)
Case No. CGC-07-274230
Plaintiff,
DEFENDANT FOSTER WHEELER LLC’S
vs. MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE
COUNSEL'S COMMENTS CONCERNING
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P), LACK OF PLAINTIFF’S ATTENDANCE
AT TRIAL
Defendants.
[03]

Defendant FOSTER WHEELER LLC (“Defendant”) moves in limine for an order
precluding Plaintiffs counsel from commenting on the Plaintiff's absence from the
courtroom,

Specifically, Defendant requests that Plaintiff's counsel and Plaintiff's witnesses be
ordered to refrain from making comments at any stage of the proceedings which infer or
suggest that the plaintiffs, or any of them, are absent because the evidence is so shocking,
graphic, emotional or upsetting that they cannot comfortably listen to it. Such comment,
as opposed to evidence, is merely an inappropriate bid for sympathy. (Evidence Code §
352.)

For example, in Ralph & Anita Beach v. Fibreboard, et al., Case No. 637472-1, counsel

began his opening statement as follows:

1

DEFENDANT FOSTER WHEELER LLC’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE COUNSEL'S
COMMENTS CONCERNING LACK OF PLAINTIFFS’ ATTENDANCE AT TRIAL [03]1
And first I would like to tell you that for most of this trial,
2 including most of this opening statement, my clients, Ralph and
Anita Beach, will not be present, and the reason for that is that
3 my remarks here would not be appropriate for them to be
listening to, as you will see from later on as I get to that point, in
4 much of the medica! testimony, similarly, would similarly not be
something that they should really be required to listen to. But I
5 don’t want you to take that as a lack of interest. This is a very
serious case for them, and will be here to the extent that they can
6 be without getting in the way of that concept that I have just
mentioned. :
7
This motion is not intended to preclude the Plaintiff from testifying as to any
8
relevant and admissible fact. Nor is it intended to preclude Plaintiff's counsel from
9
commenting on the relevant and admissible testimony of his clients. Rather, Defendant
10
merely requests the Court to grant its motion in limine precluding counsel from
ll
improperly commenting upon his or her clients’ lack of attendance at trial. Accordingly,
12
Defendant respectfully requests that the Court order Plaintiff's counsel and Plaintiff's
13
witnesses not to comnent on the absence of Plaintiff from the court room.
14
15
Dated: September 30, 2010 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER
16
17
18 By: /s/ Shelley K. Tinkoff
Edward R. Hugo
19 James C. Parker
Shelley K. Tinkoff
20 Attorneys for Defendant
FOSTER WHEELER LLC
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BRyDON
HuGo & PARKER 2.
Coen DEFENDANT FOSTER WHEELER LLC’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE COUNSEL'S
San Franciana, CA 94108 COMMENTS CONCERNING LACK OF PLAINTIFFS’ ATTENDANCE AT TRIAL [03]