Preview
FILED
12/22/2021 2:50 PM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Rhonda Burks DEPUTY
CAUSE NO. DC-19-16913
RODNEY BROWN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
Plaintiff, §
§
V. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
REYNALDO BAUTISTA AND §
IRMA BAUTISTA §
Defendants. § 116T“ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
T0 THE HONORABLE JUDGE 0F SAID COURT:
COME NOW Plaintiff Rodney Brown, before commencement of the voir dire examination
of the Jury Panel, and respectfully moves that Defendant in the above-styled and numbered cause,
any counsel Defendant might retain, and, all of Defendant’s witnesses, be instructed by an
appropriate order of this Honorable Court to refrain from making any mention or interrogation,
directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever, concerning any of the matters set forth herein,
Without first approaching the bench and obtaining a ruling of the Court outside the presence and
hearing of all prospective Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this cause regarding any alleged
theory of admissibility of such matters.
I. INADMISSIBLE MATTERS
Plaintiff would show the Court that the matters set out herein would be inadmissible for any
purpose on proper and timely objection in that they have no bearing on the issues in this case or the
rights of the parties to this suit. Permitting interrogation of witnesses, comments to prospective
Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this cause, or offers of evidence concerning these matters
would prejudice the Jury, and sustaining objections to such questions, comments, or offers would
not cure such prejudice, but rather would reinforce the impact of such prejudicial matters on such
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page -1
prospective Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this matter.
The following matters would not be admissible for any purpose in this cause.
1. Transcribed Statements/Witness Statements
That Defendant complies with the requirements of Rule 613 and other provisions of the
Texas Rules of Evidence before offering any evidence concerning any witness statement(s) that may
have been provided by any testifying witness. See TEX. R. EVID. 613.
2. Calling of Witnesses
That Plaintiff has not called to testify any witness equally available to all parties in this cause.
3. Legal Proceedings and Procedural Activities
Any reference to the legal proceedings in the case at bar. Such pre-trial litigation activity is
not relevant to any of the parties’ claims or defenses. See TEX. R. EVID. 401, 402.
Furthermore, the probative value of any reference to such legal proceedings is substantially
outweighed by its prejudicial effect. See TEX. R. EVID. 403.
4. Unidentified Witnesses
Any attempt to call as a witness any expert or person with knowledge of relevant facts who
was not identified in discovery.
5. Photographs of Vehicles in Accident
Photographs of the vehicles involved in the accident made the basis of this lawsuit. Plaintiff
is not making a claim for property damages, so they have no probative value.
6. Absent Witnesses
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, when such witness is
equally available to both parties.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 2
7. Attorney’s Fees and Taxes
Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff’ s attorney has a contingency fee in the suit.
See Azar Nut C0. v. Caille, 720 S.W.2d 685, 688 (Tex.App.—E1 Paso 1986), aff’d, 734 S.W.2d 667
(Tex. 1987). Any mention Plaintiff s recovery will not be subject to taxation. See Turner v. General
Motors Corp, 584 S.W.2d 844, 853 (Tex. 1979).
8. Prior or Subsequent Claims
Prior or subsequent claims, suits or settlements and the amounts thereof. Scurlock Oil Co.
v. Smithwick, 724 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1986); Employers Casualty Co. v. Peterson, 609 S.W.2d 579 (Tex.
CiV. App-Dallas 1980, no writ); Austin Road Co. v. Ferris, 492 S.W.2d 64 (Tex. CiV. App. - Fort
Worth 1973, writ ref’d n.r.e.); TEX. R. EVID. 408.
9. Unrelated Injuries
Other unrelated injuries or illnesses and the effects thereof, including medical records of such
unrelated injuries or illnesses.
10. Personal Habits
Personal habits of the Plaintiffs, including drinking habits, smoking habits or drug use
unconnected or associated with the occurrence in question.
11. Attorneys
Employment of Plaintiff s attorney, including time or circumstances. Martinez v. Williams,
312 S.W.2d 742 (Tex. CiV. App. - Houston 1958, no writ).
12. Social History
Prior altercations, fights or general problems associated with the Plaintiff unattached or
unconnected with the occurrence in question.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 3
13. Interest
Plaintiff’ s right to recover pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. TEX. R. EVID. 402, 403.
14. Use of Motion
That this Motion has been presented to or ruled upon by the Court. In this connection,
Plaintiff moves that Defendant be instructed to refrain from mentioning or bringing to the attention
of the Jury Panel or Jury, by argument or otherwise, that Plaintiff sought to exclude from proof any
matter bearing on the issues in this cause. See TEX. R. EVID. 402 and 403.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff Rodney Brown respectfully request
that this Motion be granted and an appropriate Order of this Court be entered pursuant thereto.
Respectfully submitted,
DUKE SETH, P.L.L.C.
/s/ Gagandeep K. Seth
GAGANDEEP K. SETH
Texas Bar No. 24062441
gkseth@dukeseth.com
325 N. St. Paul Street
Suite 2220
Dallas, Texas 75201
(214) 965-8100 Telephone
(214) 965-8101 Facsimile
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on the 22nd day of December, 2021, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing document has been served in compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to the
following:
Fernando Martinez
Chavez Legal Group
11900 N. 26m Street, Ste. 200
Edinberg, Texas 78539
/s/ Gagandeep K. Seth
GAGANDEEP K. SETH
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE
CAUSE NO. DC-l9-l69l3 Page - 5
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Cathy Garcia on behalf of Gagandeep Seth
Bar No. 24062441
cgarcia@dukeseth.com
Envelope ID: 60266826
Status as of 12/22/2021 3:12 PM CST
Associated Case Party: RODNEY BROWN
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Melissa Duke mduke@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Gagandeep K. Seth gkseth@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Maureen Gehring mgehring@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Cathy Garcia cgarcia@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
WALKER M DUKE wduke@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Kila L.Bobier bobier@chavezlegalgroup.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Associated Case Party: REYNALDO BAUTISTA
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Fernando Martinez 24070934 dallashc@progressive.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT
Preview
FILED 12/22/2021 2:50 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Rhonda Burks DEPUTY CAUSE NO. DC-19-16913 RODNEY BROWN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, § § V. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § REYNALDO BAUTISTA AND § IRMA BAUTISTA § Defendants. § 116T“ JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE T0 THE HONORABLE JUDGE 0F SAID COURT: COME NOW Plaintiff Rodney Brown, before commencement of the voir dire examination of the Jury Panel, and respectfully moves that Defendant in the above-styled and numbered cause, any counsel Defendant might retain, and, all of Defendant’s witnesses, be instructed by an appropriate order of this Honorable Court to refrain from making any mention or interrogation, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever, concerning any of the matters set forth herein, Without first approaching the bench and obtaining a ruling of the Court outside the presence and hearing of all prospective Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this cause regarding any alleged theory of admissibility of such matters. I. INADMISSIBLE MATTERS Plaintiff would show the Court that the matters set out herein would be inadmissible for any purpose on proper and timely objection in that they have no bearing on the issues in this case or the rights of the parties to this suit. Permitting interrogation of witnesses, comments to prospective Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this cause, or offers of evidence concerning these matters would prejudice the Jury, and sustaining objections to such questions, comments, or offers would not cure such prejudice, but rather would reinforce the impact of such prejudicial matters on such PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page -1 prospective Jurors or Jurors ultimately selected in this matter. The following matters would not be admissible for any purpose in this cause. 1. Transcribed Statements/Witness Statements That Defendant complies with the requirements of Rule 613 and other provisions of the Texas Rules of Evidence before offering any evidence concerning any witness statement(s) that may have been provided by any testifying witness. See TEX. R. EVID. 613. 2. Calling of Witnesses That Plaintiff has not called to testify any witness equally available to all parties in this cause. 3. Legal Proceedings and Procedural Activities Any reference to the legal proceedings in the case at bar. Such pre-trial litigation activity is not relevant to any of the parties’ claims or defenses. See TEX. R. EVID. 401, 402. Furthermore, the probative value of any reference to such legal proceedings is substantially outweighed by its prejudicial effect. See TEX. R. EVID. 403. 4. Unidentified Witnesses Any attempt to call as a witness any expert or person with knowledge of relevant facts who was not identified in discovery. 5. Photographs of Vehicles in Accident Photographs of the vehicles involved in the accident made the basis of this lawsuit. Plaintiff is not making a claim for property damages, so they have no probative value. 6. Absent Witnesses 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, when such witness is equally available to both parties. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 2 7. Attorney’s Fees and Taxes Any testimony or argument suggesting Plaintiff’ s attorney has a contingency fee in the suit. See Azar Nut C0. v. Caille, 720 S.W.2d 685, 688 (Tex.App.—E1 Paso 1986), aff’d, 734 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. 1987). Any mention Plaintiff s recovery will not be subject to taxation. See Turner v. General Motors Corp, 584 S.W.2d 844, 853 (Tex. 1979). 8. Prior or Subsequent Claims Prior or subsequent claims, suits or settlements and the amounts thereof. Scurlock Oil Co. v. Smithwick, 724 S.W.2d 1 (Tex. 1986); Employers Casualty Co. v. Peterson, 609 S.W.2d 579 (Tex. CiV. App-Dallas 1980, no writ); Austin Road Co. v. Ferris, 492 S.W.2d 64 (Tex. CiV. App. - Fort Worth 1973, writ ref’d n.r.e.); TEX. R. EVID. 408. 9. Unrelated Injuries Other unrelated injuries or illnesses and the effects thereof, including medical records of such unrelated injuries or illnesses. 10. Personal Habits Personal habits of the Plaintiffs, including drinking habits, smoking habits or drug use unconnected or associated with the occurrence in question. 11. Attorneys Employment of Plaintiff s attorney, including time or circumstances. Martinez v. Williams, 312 S.W.2d 742 (Tex. CiV. App. - Houston 1958, no writ). 12. Social History Prior altercations, fights or general problems associated with the Plaintiff unattached or unconnected with the occurrence in question. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 3 13. Interest Plaintiff’ s right to recover pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. TEX. R. EVID. 402, 403. 14. Use of Motion That this Motion has been presented to or ruled upon by the Court. In this connection, Plaintiff moves that Defendant be instructed to refrain from mentioning or bringing to the attention of the Jury Panel or Jury, by argument or otherwise, that Plaintiff sought to exclude from proof any matter bearing on the issues in this cause. See TEX. R. EVID. 402 and 403. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff Rodney Brown respectfully request that this Motion be granted and an appropriate Order of this Court be entered pursuant thereto. Respectfully submitted, DUKE SETH, P.L.L.C. /s/ Gagandeep K. Seth GAGANDEEP K. SETH Texas Bar No. 24062441 gkseth@dukeseth.com 325 N. St. Paul Street Suite 2220 Dallas, Texas 75201 (214) 965-8100 Telephone (214) 965-8101 Facsimile ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE CAUSE NO. DC-l9-16913 Page - 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 22nd day of December, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been served in compliance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure to the following: Fernando Martinez Chavez Legal Group 11900 N. 26m Street, Ste. 200 Edinberg, Texas 78539 /s/ Gagandeep K. Seth GAGANDEEP K. SETH PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE CAUSE NO. DC-l9-l69l3 Page - 5 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Cathy Garcia on behalf of Gagandeep Seth Bar No. 24062441 cgarcia@dukeseth.com Envelope ID: 60266826 Status as of 12/22/2021 3:12 PM CST Associated Case Party: RODNEY BROWN Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Melissa Duke mduke@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Gagandeep K. Seth gkseth@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Maureen Gehring mgehring@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Cathy Garcia cgarcia@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status WALKER M DUKE wduke@dukeseth.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Kila L.Bobier bobier@chavezlegalgroup.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT Associated Case Party: REYNALDO BAUTISTA Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Fernando Martinez 24070934 dallashc@progressive.com 12/22/2021 2:50:53 PM SENT