Endorsement on Motion in limine to exclude evidence of Doris's motivation in selling the building and to exclude evidence of Daniel's arrests and/or allegedly bad behavior. After review, the defendant's motion is (#36.3): Other action taken deferred to the trial judge. Judge: Howe, Hon. Janice W - Jordan L. Shapiro In his/her capacity Escrow Holder vs. Geer, Doris et al

Download Document Print Document

On August 24, 2018 an interpleader case was filed by Shapiro, Jordan L., represented by Shapiro, Esq., Jordan L, against Amato, Susan B., Croteau, Donna M., Croteau, Richard et al. represented by Hass, Esq., David M, Leblanc, Esq., Michael, Mazonson, Esq., Kenny N, Rotondi, Esq., Charles D, and Shapiro, Jordan L, in the jurisdiction of Middlesex County. Judge Kenneth J. Fishman presiding.

                        
						    Preview
                        
                        
                          36.3

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

MIDDLESEX, ss SUPERIOR COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1881CV02451

 

)

JORDAN L. SHAPIRO )
Plaintiff, )

)

v. )
)

DANIEL GEER, et al. .)
Defendants )
a)

DEFENDANT DANIEL GEER’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF
DORIS’S MOTIVATION IN SELLING THE BUILDING AND TO EXCLUDE
EVIDENCE OF DANIEL’S ARRESTS AND/OR ALLEGEDLY BAD BEHAVIOR

 

 

 

Now comes Daniel Geer, defendant in this matter, and hereby moves in Limine to
, exclude evidence regarding Doris’s motivation in selling the building in 2018. This evidence is
6 irrelevant to the issue of the division of the proceeds of the building. There is no provision for
less or more proceeds of the building being awarded due to the good or bad behavior of a party.
In addition, Daniel seeks to exclude any evidence concerning his criminal records, his

4] arrests, or his bad behavior. The prejudicial effect of this information outweighs its probative

ap Mw Ayton oe wo cerned lo the

3 value.

By his g

ne
Ja…