Judge: Laura A. Seigle, Case: 23STCV11756, Date: 2023-08-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV11756    Hearing Date: December 4, 2023    Dept: 15

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Defendants’ MIL No. 1

            Defendant Union Carbide moves to exclude evidence of its relationship with Dow Chemical.  This motion is too vague.  If at trial Plaintiff asks questions about Dow Chemical that are irrelevant, Defendant can object at that time.  The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Defendants’ MIL No. 2

Defendant Union Carbide moves to exclude evidence of working conditions at its facilities as irrelevant and unduly prejudicial.  This motion is too vague.  If “working conditions” refers to something like wage and hour violations, that would be irrelevant.  However, if it refers to something like workers being exposed to asbestos, the evidence could be relevant.  For example, the evidence of asbestos exposure at the facilities could be relevant to knowledge or notice.

            The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Defendants’ MIL No. 3

Union Carbide moves to exclude any reference to incidents where people died or were injured as a result of Union Carbide’s chemicals other than asbestos.  Incidents not involving asbestos are irrelevant, more prejudicial than probative, and would be unduly time consuming.

            The motion is granted.

            The moving party is to give notice.