arrow left
arrow right
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
  • Ables, Sonya vs. Granite Oaks Apartment Homes et alCivil-Roseville document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 JEFFERY C. LONG – State Bar # 226618 ERIC S. EMANUELS – State Bar # 140168 2 LEVANGIE LAW GROUP 2021 N Street 3 Sacramento, CA 95811 Tel: (916) 443-4849 4 Fax: (916) 443-4855 Email: jeffery.long@llg-law.com 5 Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Complainants 6 GRANITE OAKS APARTMENT HOMES and FIRST POINTE MANAGEMENT GROUP 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER 10 11 SONYA ABLES, CASE NO. SCV0040413 12 Plaintiff, MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 13 v. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE 14 GRANITE OAKS APARTMENT HOMES, REFERENCE TO DEFENDANTS’ FIRST POINTE MANAGEMENT GROUP, ABSENCE FROM TRIAL 15 THE EZRALOW COMPANY, LLC, and DOES 1 through 20, 16 Defendants. 17 18 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS. Complaint Filed : 12/04/17 Trial Date : 06/08/20 19 20 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 21 COME NOW Defendants GRANITE OAKS APARTMENT HOMES and 22 FIRST POINTE MANAGEMENT GROUP and move for an order precluding any reference to 23 the absence of Defendant’s representatives during trial. This motion is based on the grounds that 24 such references violate Evidence Code §352 and should be excluded under the same. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES 2 I. ARGUMENT 3 Plaintiff SONYA ABLES filed a personal injury lawsuit alleging negligence because she 4 fell at 9:00 p.m. on August 11, 2015, while carrying a bag of potting soil on a walkway that she 5 had used between 7 and 14 times weekly for the previous two years. She alleges that lighting 6 was inadequate and that she will require ankle surgery because of her fall. 7 A. THIS COURT SHOULD INSTRUCT THE JURY THAT ANY ABSENCE OF DEFENDANT DURING THE TRIAL SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED OR 8 CONSTRUED ADVERSELY. 9 In a civil trial, the attendance of the parties or their representatives at trial, unless 10 subpoenaed or otherwise required, is not necessary. In this case, Defendant Aronson 11 Landscaping is a small company that is operated primarily by the owner and it is currently 12 engaged in numerous ongoing projects. Defendants Granite Oaks and First Pointe are large 13 companies operated out of a corporate office in Southern California. Although representatives 14 plan to attend the trial, one or more may be absent at times due to professional obligations related 15 to these ongoing projects and/or the limitations caused by travel. Because a jury may not be 16 aware of the non-attendance requirement, they may view the unexplained absence in a manner so 17 as to draw an unfavorable inference toward them (particularly if commented upon by counsel). 18 As such, the lack of specific instructions to the contrary could pose a substantial danger of 19 prejudice to Defendants. 20 California Evidence Code §352 provides in pertinent part: 21 The court in its discretion may exclude evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its 22 admission will . . . (b) create substantial danger of undue prejudice, of confusing the issues, or of misleading the jury. 23 24 Although the general rule is that all facts having rational probative value are admissible, this 25 principle is subject to a number of exceptions, based upon a counter-balancing of factors and 26 extrinsic policy. Among these, the most important is undue prejudice. See, generally, Love v. 27 Wolf (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 378. Another is that justice is to be accorded to the rich and poor 28 alike. Id. Therefore, Defendants submit that they would suffer undue prejudice and be unjustly 2 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 1 treated because of its absence at trial if a jury was not informed and/or if Plaintiff’s counsel 2 attempts to negatively comment upon such absence. That result would fly in the face of 3 Evidence Code §352 and the injustices it is designed to prevent. 4 II. CONCLUSION 5 For the foregoing reasons, Defendant GRANITE OAKS APARTMENT HOMES and 6 FIRST POINTE MANAGEMENT GROUP, respectfully request this Court advise the jury that 7 any absence of their representatives during trial must not be construed adversely against them. 8 Additionally, any such absence should not be commented upon by counsel during the trial in this 9 matter. 10 11 DATED: May 27, 2020 LEVANGIE LAW GROUP 12 13 By:___________________________________ JEFFERY C. LONG 14 ERIC S. EMANUELS Attorney for Defendants/Cross-Complainants 15 GRANITE OAKS APARTMENT HOMES and FIRST POINTE MANAGEMENT GROUP 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 1 Ables v. Granite Oaks, et. al. Placer County Superior Court Case No. SCV0040413 2 3 PROOF OF SERVICE 4 I, the undersigned, declare that I am, and was at the time of service of the papers herein referred to, over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action or proceeding. My 5 business address is 2021 N Street, Sacramento, California, 95811, which is located in the county in which the within-mentioned service occurred. 6 7 On this date, I served the following document(s): MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO EXCLUDE REFERENCE TO DEFENDANTS’ ABSENCE 8 FROM TRIAL to each addressee named below: 9 Robin J. Smith James H. Olson R.J. Smith Law Office Law Offices of Yempuku & McNamara 10 P.O. Box 698 2180 Harvard Street, Suite 375 Roseville, CA 95661 Sacramento, CA 95815 11 rsmith@rjsmithlawoffice.com Phone: (916) 649-8333 / Fax: (603) 334-7903 pgarcia@rjsmithlawoffice.com james.olson@libertymutual.com 12 Phone: (916) 437-4301 / Fax: (916) 437-4302 sacmail@libertymutual.com. ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Attorneys for Defendant 13 ARONSON INDUSTRIES, INC. (erroneously sued as ARONSON 14 LANDSCAPE, INC.) (DOE 1) 15 [X] ONLY BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION. Only by e-mailing the document(s) to the persons at the e-mail address(es) listed above based on notice provided on March 17, 16 2020 that, during the Coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, this office will be working remotely, not able to send physical mail as usual, and is therefore using only electronic 17 mail. No electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful was received within a reasonable time after the transmission. We will continue to treat 18 deadlines set forth by the Code of Civil Procedure for physical mailing as our deadlines for serving by e-mail, assuring all counsel actually receive additional notice. 19 20 Executed on May 27, 2020, at Sacramento, California. 21 I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. 22 23 __________________________________ Holly Marquard 24 25 26 27 28 4 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6