Preview
Filing # 89582026 E-Filed 05/15/2019 03:28:05 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MANATEE COUNTY FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION
JOSHUA RAY CANTRILL,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2013-CA-4462
KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS,
RACHEL M. WEBER,
Defendants.
LERAY CANTRILL,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 2013CA5821
KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS,
Defendant.
/
DEFENDANT KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS’S THIRD MOTION IN LIMINE
COMES NOW, the Defendant, KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS (“Defendant”), by and
through the undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Third Motion in Limine to prevent the
Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ counsel, and Plaintiffs’ witnesses and experts from introducing any evidence,
testimony, depositions, statements, documents, or comments regarding the following matters:
1. Any mention of the Defendant’s job as a CFO, nor any mention of his income and/or
ability to pay a verdict and/or judgment.
2. Any mention of either Plaintiff's ability or inability to pay for medical care. In the
recent Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, counsel for Leray Cantrill asked Dr. Tolli
E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM-PG 1 of 5whether Leray Cantril treated under a Letter of Protection because he had “no other way to pay.”
Such a question implicates insurance (or lack thereof), and also juxtaposes one parties’ ability to pay
against another. Further, Dr. Tolli went on to say it is wholly irrelevant whether the Cantrills were
able to pay via for treatment via any other means (i.e. medicaid/health insurance/cash/etc.), because
Dr. Tolli requires that all car accident patient sign and treat under an LOP. In other words, even had
Leray Cantrill had another means to pay, Dr. Tolli would not have allowed that, so the question of
whether Mr. Cantrill did or did not have other means to pay is wholly irrelevant.
3. Any cumulative testimony from treating physician Thomas Tolli, MD regarding his
training, experience, and qualifications. Counsel for Plaintiff Joshua Cantrill covered Dr. Tolli’s
training, experience, and qualifications in his video deposition for trial of Dr. Tolli on March 29,
2019. Counsel for Leray then re-covered the same material in his video deposition for trial of Dr.
Tolli taken on April 12, 2019. Undersigned counsel is under the impression from counsel for
Plaintiff Josh Cantrill that he intends to play his video deposition for trial first. Therefore, this Court
should strike or limit the portions of the video deposition for trial of Dr. Tolli for Leray Cantrill to
omit those questions and responses.
4. Any testimony from Dr. Thomas Tolli regarding any biomechanical analysis, i.e.
whether the property damage photos causally support a causation opinion for Mr. Cantrill’s alleged
injuries. Specifically, Dr. Tolli was asked in his video deposition for trial for Leray Cantrill, taken
on April 12, 2019, the following:
Q: Did you ever see any photographs of the damage to the car or the trailer?
A: Yes,
Q: The damage that you observed, you’ve looked at other property damage photos
in your career?
E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM - PG 2 of 5A: Yes.
Q: Is there a direct correlation between what you’ve seen in the property damage
photographs and the degree or severity of injury?
Defense Counsel: Objection; lack of predicate [regarding any biomechanical
training, experience, and/or qualifications or analysis in to the forces involved in the accident and
their ability (or lack of ability) to cause the alleged injuries].
A: No. There is no correlation. You coul dhave an impact where there’s low property
damage or minor property damage and have a significant injury. You can also have terrible
property damage, a total loss of the car and have no injuries. So there’s no direct correlation
between the amount of damage and the amount of injuries, so it varies.
Q: And is that opinion that you just offered based on your education, training,
background, and experiences?
Defense Counsel: Objection to form.
A: Yes, and also basic science. I mean it’s well known.
Q: That was my next question. Is t also based on generally accepted scientific
principles that you learned and understood in your trainings?
Defense Counsel: Same objection.
A: Yes.
Q: In your, again the opinion applying those two standards I just gave you, was
Leray Cantrill’s injury and were his complaints in any way inconsistent with the pictures?
Defense counsel: Objection, lack of predicate.
A: No.
Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P. 20, L. 10 - P. 21, L. 22.
E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM - PG 3 of 5The issue was re-addressed in Dr. Tolli’s continued video deposition for trial for Leray Cantril,
taken on May 10, 2019:
Q: Were you at any time made aware of the rather modest damage to the vehicles
involved in this incident?
A: Yes.
Q: And I cant recall if we talked about that the first time or not, I think we did, but
as we have come close to finishing now, does that modest damage or lack of damage, if you will,
change your opinions?
A: No.
Defense Counsel: Objection, lack of predicate.
A: No. When there’s property damage that’s not terribly severe, that has no
correlation with the type of injuries people sustain. So you can have mild property damage with a
severe injury, you can have severe property damage with no injury. So there’s no direct correlation.
Q: And is that based upon your education, training, background, and experience?
A: Yes.
See Dr. Tolli’s video deposition for Trial, taken May 10, 2019, P. 79, L. 2 - 25.
5. Any testimony from Dr. Tolli to bolster treatment decisions made by other providers. See
Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P. 24, L. 2 - 8, and Video
Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, May 10, 2019, P. 138, L. 13 - P. 139, L. 11. Itis improper
for one physician to comment on whether another physician’s treatment and/or recommendations
were proper or improper.
6. Any testimony from Dr. Tolli that he is better able to read MRI films or diagnostic studies
than radiologists. See Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P41. L. 15 -
E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM- PG 4 of 5P. 42,L. 1.
7, Any testimony from Dr. Tolli regarding Mr. Leray Cantrill’s propensity for honesty and/or
embellishment, or lack thereof. In Dr. Tolli’s video deposition for trial taken May 10, 2019, counsel
for Leray Cantrill asked whether Mr. Cantrill was “a whiner,” and whether Mr. Cantrill was a
“difficult patient.” See Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, May 10, 2019, P. 135, L. 22 -
P. 137, L. 18.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS, respectfully requests this
Court enter an Order in Limine prohibiting the Plaintiffs, Plaintiff's counsel, and Plaintiffs
witnesses and experts from introducing any evidence, testimony, depositions, statements, documents
or comments regarding the above matters.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
THEREBY CERTIFY a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been provided via eservice
to Counsel for Plaintiff, Joshua Cantrill, mailrob@salterhealy.com and servicerob@salterhealy.com
ROBERT J. HEALY, JR., ESQUIRE, SALTER, HEALY, LLC, PO BOX 10807, ST.
PETERSBURG, FL 33733-0807, and Counsel for Plaintiff Leray Cantrill Frank Currie, Esquire,
P.O. Box 2291, St. Petersburg, FL 33742, fic@tampabay.rr.com on this 15" day of May 2019.
DICKINSON & GIBBONS, P.A.
By:4/Andrew L. Douberly
JEFFREY D. PEAIRS
Florida Bar No. 0875260
ANDREW L. DOUBERLY
Florida Bar No. 0088193
Gateway Professional Center
401 North Cattlemen Road, Suite 300
Sarasota, FL 34232-6438
Phone: (941) 366-4680
Fax: (941) 365-2923
jpeairs@dglawyers.com
snoonan@dglawyers.com
adouberly@dglawyers.com
jhamill@dglawyers.com
Counsel for Defendant, FERRIS
E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM-PG5 of 5
Preview
Filing # 89582026 E-Filed 05/15/2019 03:28:05 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MANATEE COUNTY FLORIDA CIVIL DIVISION JOSHUA RAY CANTRILL, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2013-CA-4462 KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS, RACHEL M. WEBER, Defendants. LERAY CANTRILL, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2013CA5821 KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS, Defendant. / DEFENDANT KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS’S THIRD MOTION IN LIMINE COMES NOW, the Defendant, KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS (“Defendant”), by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Third Motion in Limine to prevent the Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ counsel, and Plaintiffs’ witnesses and experts from introducing any evidence, testimony, depositions, statements, documents, or comments regarding the following matters: 1. Any mention of the Defendant’s job as a CFO, nor any mention of his income and/or ability to pay a verdict and/or judgment. 2. Any mention of either Plaintiff's ability or inability to pay for medical care. In the recent Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, counsel for Leray Cantrill asked Dr. Tolli E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM-PG 1 of 5whether Leray Cantril treated under a Letter of Protection because he had “no other way to pay.” Such a question implicates insurance (or lack thereof), and also juxtaposes one parties’ ability to pay against another. Further, Dr. Tolli went on to say it is wholly irrelevant whether the Cantrills were able to pay via for treatment via any other means (i.e. medicaid/health insurance/cash/etc.), because Dr. Tolli requires that all car accident patient sign and treat under an LOP. In other words, even had Leray Cantrill had another means to pay, Dr. Tolli would not have allowed that, so the question of whether Mr. Cantrill did or did not have other means to pay is wholly irrelevant. 3. Any cumulative testimony from treating physician Thomas Tolli, MD regarding his training, experience, and qualifications. Counsel for Plaintiff Joshua Cantrill covered Dr. Tolli’s training, experience, and qualifications in his video deposition for trial of Dr. Tolli on March 29, 2019. Counsel for Leray then re-covered the same material in his video deposition for trial of Dr. Tolli taken on April 12, 2019. Undersigned counsel is under the impression from counsel for Plaintiff Josh Cantrill that he intends to play his video deposition for trial first. Therefore, this Court should strike or limit the portions of the video deposition for trial of Dr. Tolli for Leray Cantrill to omit those questions and responses. 4. Any testimony from Dr. Thomas Tolli regarding any biomechanical analysis, i.e. whether the property damage photos causally support a causation opinion for Mr. Cantrill’s alleged injuries. Specifically, Dr. Tolli was asked in his video deposition for trial for Leray Cantrill, taken on April 12, 2019, the following: Q: Did you ever see any photographs of the damage to the car or the trailer? A: Yes, Q: The damage that you observed, you’ve looked at other property damage photos in your career? E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM - PG 2 of 5A: Yes. Q: Is there a direct correlation between what you’ve seen in the property damage photographs and the degree or severity of injury? Defense Counsel: Objection; lack of predicate [regarding any biomechanical training, experience, and/or qualifications or analysis in to the forces involved in the accident and their ability (or lack of ability) to cause the alleged injuries]. A: No. There is no correlation. You coul dhave an impact where there’s low property damage or minor property damage and have a significant injury. You can also have terrible property damage, a total loss of the car and have no injuries. So there’s no direct correlation between the amount of damage and the amount of injuries, so it varies. Q: And is that opinion that you just offered based on your education, training, background, and experiences? Defense Counsel: Objection to form. A: Yes, and also basic science. I mean it’s well known. Q: That was my next question. Is t also based on generally accepted scientific principles that you learned and understood in your trainings? Defense Counsel: Same objection. A: Yes. Q: In your, again the opinion applying those two standards I just gave you, was Leray Cantrill’s injury and were his complaints in any way inconsistent with the pictures? Defense counsel: Objection, lack of predicate. A: No. Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P. 20, L. 10 - P. 21, L. 22. E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM - PG 3 of 5The issue was re-addressed in Dr. Tolli’s continued video deposition for trial for Leray Cantril, taken on May 10, 2019: Q: Were you at any time made aware of the rather modest damage to the vehicles involved in this incident? A: Yes. Q: And I cant recall if we talked about that the first time or not, I think we did, but as we have come close to finishing now, does that modest damage or lack of damage, if you will, change your opinions? A: No. Defense Counsel: Objection, lack of predicate. A: No. When there’s property damage that’s not terribly severe, that has no correlation with the type of injuries people sustain. So you can have mild property damage with a severe injury, you can have severe property damage with no injury. So there’s no direct correlation. Q: And is that based upon your education, training, background, and experience? A: Yes. See Dr. Tolli’s video deposition for Trial, taken May 10, 2019, P. 79, L. 2 - 25. 5. Any testimony from Dr. Tolli to bolster treatment decisions made by other providers. See Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P. 24, L. 2 - 8, and Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, May 10, 2019, P. 138, L. 13 - P. 139, L. 11. Itis improper for one physician to comment on whether another physician’s treatment and/or recommendations were proper or improper. 6. Any testimony from Dr. Tolli that he is better able to read MRI films or diagnostic studies than radiologists. See Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, April 12, 2019, P41. L. 15 - E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM- PG 4 of 5P. 42,L. 1. 7, Any testimony from Dr. Tolli regarding Mr. Leray Cantrill’s propensity for honesty and/or embellishment, or lack thereof. In Dr. Tolli’s video deposition for trial taken May 10, 2019, counsel for Leray Cantrill asked whether Mr. Cantrill was “a whiner,” and whether Mr. Cantrill was a “difficult patient.” See Video Deposition for Trial of Dr. Thomas Tolli, May 10, 2019, P. 135, L. 22 - P. 137, L. 18. WHEREFORE, the Defendant, KRISTOPHER SCOTT FERRIS, respectfully requests this Court enter an Order in Limine prohibiting the Plaintiffs, Plaintiff's counsel, and Plaintiffs witnesses and experts from introducing any evidence, testimony, depositions, statements, documents or comments regarding the above matters. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE THEREBY CERTIFY a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been provided via eservice to Counsel for Plaintiff, Joshua Cantrill, mailrob@salterhealy.com and servicerob@salterhealy.com ROBERT J. HEALY, JR., ESQUIRE, SALTER, HEALY, LLC, PO BOX 10807, ST. PETERSBURG, FL 33733-0807, and Counsel for Plaintiff Leray Cantrill Frank Currie, Esquire, P.O. Box 2291, St. Petersburg, FL 33742, fic@tampabay.rr.com on this 15" day of May 2019. DICKINSON & GIBBONS, P.A. By:4/Andrew L. Douberly JEFFREY D. PEAIRS Florida Bar No. 0875260 ANDREW L. DOUBERLY Florida Bar No. 0088193 Gateway Professional Center 401 North Cattlemen Road, Suite 300 Sarasota, FL 34232-6438 Phone: (941) 366-4680 Fax: (941) 365-2923 jpeairs@dglawyers.com snoonan@dglawyers.com adouberly@dglawyers.com jhamill@dglawyers.com Counsel for Defendant, FERRIS E-Filed with MCCC - 2013CA004462AX- 5/15/2019 3:28 PM-PG5 of 5