The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mary L. Cooper United States District Judge
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE
DEFENDANT, Ford Motor Company, filing several motions in limine (dkt. entry nos. 218, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, and 229); and
THE COURT HAVING CONSIDERED the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motions; and the Court having heard argument from the parties on December 21, 2009; and for the reasons stated by the Court on the record; and for good cause appearing;
IT IS THEREFORE on this 22nd day of December, 2009, ORDERED as follows:
Defendant's motion to preclude evidence in support of plaintiffs' punitive damages claim (dkt. entry no. 218) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and
Defendant's motion for a pretrial instruction to the jury prohibiting the use of electronic media (dkt. entry no. 224) is GRANTED; and
Defendant's motion to preclude reference to electromagnetic interference or other specific defect theory (dkt. entry no. 225) is GRANTED, with individual evidentiary rulings to be made separately; and
Defendant's motion to require the plaintiffs to provide edited videotapes of deposition testimony at least forty-eight hours in advance of their presentation (dkt. entry no. 226) is GRANTED; and
Defendant's motion to limit the testimony of William Berg to the parameters set in the first trial (dkt. entry no. 227) is GRANTED; and
Defendant's motion to reinstate the Court's prior rulings concerning the Updegrove investigation (dkt. entry no. 228) is GRANTED; and
Defendant's motion to limit evidence of other similar incidents (dkt. entry no. 229) is GRANTED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...