Plaintiff’s attempt to elicit expert testimony from any of her fact witnesses unless they have been properly designated as experts as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and/or have personal knowledge of the facts relevant to the claims made basis of this suit.Īlthough Home Depot is correct that Ramos may not elicit expert testimony from fact witnesses, Home Depot does not object to specific testimony, so the Court lacks a sufficiently developed record to determine the admissibility witness testimony. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion as premature with respect to this issue and will entertain objections to witness testimony at trial. Any and all references to any disciplinary action, deficiency write ups or other admonishments to any Home Depot associate that is unrelated or not substantially similar to the incident made the basis of this suit.
Any and all references by Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s counsel regarding any percentage of negligence. Any reference to any Occupational Safety and Health Administration violations or investigations at Home Depot that are not related to or arising from the incident made the basis of this suit. Ramos does not object to this limine request. Therefore, the Court GRANTS the motion as to this issue. Any references in the admissible medical records that include estimated costs for medical procedures that have not been performed. Home Depot contends that any such evidence would not be considered a “medical record” for treatment provided as an exception to the rule against hearsay. Moreover, it argues generally, without explanation, that this evidence is irrelevant and would cause unfair prejudice, undue delay, and would mislead the jury. As Ramos points out, one question at the heart of this case is the extent of Ramos’s past and future medical expenses, so the evidence is relevant.
#Benzel macmaster m d trial
Benzel macmaster md trial#īecause Home Depot does not object to specific statements within Ramos’s records it believes should be excluded, and because Ramos plans to have her providers testify at trial as to her future medical costs, the Court DENIES the motion as premature but will entertain appropriate objections at trial. Any reference by any treating physician to medical treatment provided to Plaintiff that was not performed by that physician. This issue was addressed in the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order on Home Depot’s motion to limit the testimony of two of Ramos’s treating physicians.
0 kommentar(er)
