Preview
FILED
5/23/2017 7:10:28 AM
JOHN F. WARREN
COUNTY CLERK
DALLAS COUNTY
CAUSE NO. CC-16-00794-E
RONEISA TRAHAN § IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW
Plaintiff, §
§
V. § NO. 5
§
SHASTA SCOTT §
Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED MOTION IN LIMINE
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COMES Plaintiff, Roneisa Trahan, Movant herein, prior to the voir dire
examination of the jury panel and out of the presence and hearing of the panel, and makes this
First Amended Motion in Limine.
I.
Movant seeks to exclude matters that are irrelevant, inadmissible, or prejudicial to
the material issues in this cause. If said matters are introduced into the trial of this cause through
a party, a witness, or an attorney, such introduction will cause irreparable harm to Movant’s case,
which would not be cured by any jury instruction.
II.
Movant requests the Court to instruct all counsel and the parties herein that violation
of any of these instructions may cause harm to Movant and deprive Movant of a fair and
impartial trial, and the failure to abide by such instructions may constitute contempt of court.
III.
Should any of these matters be brought to the attention of the jury, either directly or
indirectly, Movant will be compelled to move for a mistrial. In an effort to avoid prejudice and a
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 1
possible mistrial, Movant urges the Court to grant this Motion in Limine.
IV.
Movant requests the Court to enter the attached order prohibiting counsel or the
parties from offering any of the evidence listed below, without first asking for a ruling from the
Court, out of the hearing of the jury, on the admissibility of the evidence:
1. Any evidence not produced by Defendant in discovery.
Defendants should not be permitted to present any witness not named in discovery
responses, or any evidence requested by Plaintiff but not produced by Defendants.
See, e.g., Gee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 765 S.W.2d 394, 395 (Tex. 1989).
2. Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff, through his
attorney, asserted claims of privilege during discovery. Claims of Privilege are
inadmissible as evidence. See Tex. R. Evid. 513(a), (b).
3. Any testimony by Defendant’s experts concerning their
discussions with another expert.
4. Any attempt to elicit testimony from Plaintiff about
communications with his lawyers. Such communication is privileged. Tex R.
Evid. 503.
5. Any comment by Defendant’s attorney that informs the jury of
the effect of its answers to the questions in the charge.
6. Any mention of the probable testimony of a witness who is
absent, unavailable, not called to testify in this case, or not allowed to testify, in
any manner, in this case.
7. Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff’s attorney has a
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 2
contingency fee in the suit.
8. Any mention that Plaintiff’s recovery would not be subject to
taxation.
9. Any other reference to collateral sources, including by not limited
to medical insurance benefits.
10. Any mention that the parties engaged in settlement negotiations.
11. Any mention of prior misconduct or criminal activity of Plaintiff.
12. Prior claims, suits or settlements by Plaintiff and the amounts
thereof.
13. Employment of Plaintiff’s attorney, including time or
circumstances.
14. Comment regarding Plaintiff’s failure to call a witness to testify
equally available to both parties.
15. Reference to this motion being filed or any ruling pertaining to
same.
16. Any inquiry into or references to how Plaintiff was referred to or
received a referral by any attorney or person associated with any attorney to any
medical chiropractor or healthcare provider(s).
17. Discussing whether Plaintiff’s counsel has engaged in any form
of advertising or any questions that might infer that Plaintiff’s counsel uses
certain forms of advertising.
18. Inquiring whether or not Plaintiff’s medical bills have been paid.
19. Offering any testimony of evidence concerning the necessity of
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 3
the treatment rendered or the reasonableness of charges on a basis that is not set
out in a properly prepared and filed controverting affidavit per the requirements of
Ch. 18 Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
20. Offering any testimony concerning the contents of documents not
in evidence, except to establish the predicate for admissibility or for impeachment
of a witness then on the witness stand.
21. Offering any evidence or questioning regarding any civil
litigation Plaintiff, attorney or any healthcare provider has been in, without a
showing of relevance.
22. Any reference or inquiry directly or indirectly as to whether or
not any part has had any license suspension of any kind or was driving without a
license (Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 401-404); Medina v. Salinas, 736 S.W.2d 224
(Tex.App. – Corpus Christi 1987, writ denied) (trial court properly excluded
driver’s lack of driver’s license because there was not a claim for negligent
entrustment and “lack of a license does not, as a matter of law, make a driver
liable or constitute a proximate cause of a collision”); Miller v. Jones, 270 S.W.2d
303 (Tex.Civ.App. – Dallas 1954, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (trial court’s exclusion of
driver’s failure to have driver’s license not error where there was no issue
regarding negligent entrustment.)
23. Any reference to property damage costs or appraisals that have
not been or will not be testified to and proven up by an expert in the field.
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 4
PRAYER
For these reasons, Plaintiff asks the court to instruct Defendants and their witnesses
and counsel not to mention, refer to, interrogate about, or attempt to convey to the jury any of the
matters listed above without first asking for a ruling from the court out of the presence of the
jury.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Movant pray the Court grants this
Motion in Limine, and for such other and further relief that may be awarded at law or in equity.
Respectfully submitted,
Godsey Martin, P.C.
By:
Ryan E. Rogers
Texas Bar No. 24011200
Godsey Martin, P.C.
1909 Woodall Rodgers Freeway, Suite 200
Dallas, TX 75201
Tel. (214) 744-3339
Fax. (972) 301-2444
rrogers@gmfirm.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of May, 2017, a true and correct copy of this
document was served upon all counsel of record via electronic filing in accordance with Texas
Rules of Civil Procedure.
Steven Santayana
Law Office of Driskell & Lawrence
105 Decker Court, Suite 150
Irving, Texas 75062
_________________________
Ryan E. Rogers
Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 6
Preview
FILED 5/23/2017 7:10:28 AM JOHN F. WARREN COUNTY CLERK DALLAS COUNTY CAUSE NO. CC-16-00794-E RONEISA TRAHAN § IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW Plaintiff, § § V. § NO. 5 § SHASTA SCOTT § Defendant. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED MOTION IN LIMINE TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES Plaintiff, Roneisa Trahan, Movant herein, prior to the voir dire examination of the jury panel and out of the presence and hearing of the panel, and makes this First Amended Motion in Limine. I. Movant seeks to exclude matters that are irrelevant, inadmissible, or prejudicial to the material issues in this cause. If said matters are introduced into the trial of this cause through a party, a witness, or an attorney, such introduction will cause irreparable harm to Movant’s case, which would not be cured by any jury instruction. II. Movant requests the Court to instruct all counsel and the parties herein that violation of any of these instructions may cause harm to Movant and deprive Movant of a fair and impartial trial, and the failure to abide by such instructions may constitute contempt of court. III. Should any of these matters be brought to the attention of the jury, either directly or indirectly, Movant will be compelled to move for a mistrial. In an effort to avoid prejudice and a Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 1 possible mistrial, Movant urges the Court to grant this Motion in Limine. IV. Movant requests the Court to enter the attached order prohibiting counsel or the parties from offering any of the evidence listed below, without first asking for a ruling from the Court, out of the hearing of the jury, on the admissibility of the evidence: 1. Any evidence not produced by Defendant in discovery. Defendants should not be permitted to present any witness not named in discovery responses, or any evidence requested by Plaintiff but not produced by Defendants. See, e.g., Gee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 765 S.W.2d 394, 395 (Tex. 1989). 2. Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff, through his attorney, asserted claims of privilege during discovery. Claims of Privilege are inadmissible as evidence. See Tex. R. Evid. 513(a), (b). 3. Any testimony by Defendant’s experts concerning their discussions with another expert. 4. Any attempt to elicit testimony from Plaintiff about communications with his lawyers. Such communication is privileged. Tex R. Evid. 503. 5. Any comment by Defendant’s attorney that informs the jury of the effect of its answers to the questions in the charge. 6. Any mention of the probable testimony of a witness who is absent, unavailable, not called to testify in this case, or not allowed to testify, in any manner, in this case. 7. Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff’s attorney has a Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 2 contingency fee in the suit. 8. Any mention that Plaintiff’s recovery would not be subject to taxation. 9. Any other reference to collateral sources, including by not limited to medical insurance benefits. 10. Any mention that the parties engaged in settlement negotiations. 11. Any mention of prior misconduct or criminal activity of Plaintiff. 12. Prior claims, suits or settlements by Plaintiff and the amounts thereof. 13. Employment of Plaintiff’s attorney, including time or circumstances. 14. Comment regarding Plaintiff’s failure to call a witness to testify equally available to both parties. 15. Reference to this motion being filed or any ruling pertaining to same. 16. Any inquiry into or references to how Plaintiff was referred to or received a referral by any attorney or person associated with any attorney to any medical chiropractor or healthcare provider(s). 17. Discussing whether Plaintiff’s counsel has engaged in any form of advertising or any questions that might infer that Plaintiff’s counsel uses certain forms of advertising. 18. Inquiring whether or not Plaintiff’s medical bills have been paid. 19. Offering any testimony of evidence concerning the necessity of Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 3 the treatment rendered or the reasonableness of charges on a basis that is not set out in a properly prepared and filed controverting affidavit per the requirements of Ch. 18 Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. 20. Offering any testimony concerning the contents of documents not in evidence, except to establish the predicate for admissibility or for impeachment of a witness then on the witness stand. 21. Offering any evidence or questioning regarding any civil litigation Plaintiff, attorney or any healthcare provider has been in, without a showing of relevance. 22. Any reference or inquiry directly or indirectly as to whether or not any part has had any license suspension of any kind or was driving without a license (Tex. R. Civ. Evid. 401-404); Medina v. Salinas, 736 S.W.2d 224 (Tex.App. – Corpus Christi 1987, writ denied) (trial court properly excluded driver’s lack of driver’s license because there was not a claim for negligent entrustment and “lack of a license does not, as a matter of law, make a driver liable or constitute a proximate cause of a collision”); Miller v. Jones, 270 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Civ.App. – Dallas 1954, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (trial court’s exclusion of driver’s failure to have driver’s license not error where there was no issue regarding negligent entrustment.) 23. Any reference to property damage costs or appraisals that have not been or will not be testified to and proven up by an expert in the field. Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 4 PRAYER For these reasons, Plaintiff asks the court to instruct Defendants and their witnesses and counsel not to mention, refer to, interrogate about, or attempt to convey to the jury any of the matters listed above without first asking for a ruling from the court out of the presence of the jury. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Movant pray the Court grants this Motion in Limine, and for such other and further relief that may be awarded at law or in equity. Respectfully submitted, Godsey Martin, P.C. By: Ryan E. Rogers Texas Bar No. 24011200 Godsey Martin, P.C. 1909 Woodall Rodgers Freeway, Suite 200 Dallas, TX 75201 Tel. (214) 744-3339 Fax. (972) 301-2444 rrogers@gmfirm.com Attorney for Plaintiff Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of May, 2017, a true and correct copy of this document was served upon all counsel of record via electronic filing in accordance with Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Steven Santayana Law Office of Driskell & Lawrence 105 Decker Court, Suite 150 Irving, Texas 75062 _________________________ Ryan E. Rogers Plaintiff’s First Amended Motion in Limine 6