Judge: Laura A. Seigle, Case: 37, Date: 2023-02-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 37-2022-00018334    Hearing Date: February 14, 2023    Dept: 15

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

Plaintiffs’ MIL No. 1

            Plaintiff seeks to exclude the complaint, preliminary fact sheet, and the fact that other defendants were sued who are no longer in the case.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, a motion to modify the caption on documents that may be presented to the jury to refer only to defendants remaining in the case is deemed made and granted but not so as to affect any allocation of fault under Proposition 51.  A motion to exclude evidence about the liability of tortfeasors not present at trial is deemed made and denied. 

Therefore the motion is granted and and denied in part in accordance with the July 8, 2022 CMO.

Plaintiffs’ MIL No. 2

            Plaintiffs seek to exclude evidence concerning the sophisticated user defense because it does not apply in this case and there is no evidence supporting the defense.  This motion is too vague.  Plaintiffs do not cite any answer by any defendant in this case alleging that defense.  And if a defendant did assert that defense, then Plaintiffs’ argument that no evidence supports this defense shows that this motion seeks improper summary adjudication of a defense.

            The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Plaintiffs’ MIL No. 3

Plaintiffs move to exclude arguments about asbestos-containing the products winning the war.  This motion is vague and overbroad.  Evidence of military uses of asbestos may be relevant to knowledge and notice.

The motion is denied without prejudice to objection at trial.

Plaintiffs’ MIL Nos. 4, 5

Plaintiffs move to exclude evidence of complaints filed in bankruptcy cases and an order from the Garlock bankruptcy case.  Evidence and arguments about what happened in bankruptcy cases have little probative value, will be prejudicial and will consume an undue amount of trial time to explain the context and proceedings of those cases. 

            The motions are granted.

Plaintiffs’ MIL No. 6

            Plaintiff seeks to exclude evidence of other settlements in this case.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is deemed made and granted.

            The motion is granted.

Plaintiffs’ MIL No. 7

            Plaintiffs move to exclude testimony from experts about whether they believe Plaintiffs’ product identification testimony.  This motion is too vague.

            The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Defendants’ MIL No. 1

            Defendant seek to preclude reference to the absence of corporate representatives at trial.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is deemed made and granted.  The motion is granted.

Defendants’ MIL No. 2

            Defendants seek to exclude testimony from lay witnesses about the asbestos content of talc products on the ground that they are not qualified.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is deemed made and denied.  Defendants did not show good cause to depart from this order.  Therefore, the motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Defendants’ MIL No. 3

Defendants move to exclude evidence of medical expenses not actually incurred.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is presumptively denied, and Defendants did not show cause to depart from that presumption.

The motion is denied.

Defendants’ MIL No. 4

            Defendants move to bifurcate punitive damage.  The motion is granted.

Defendants’ MIL No. 5

            Defendants seek to exclude reference to other asbestos-containing products made by Goodyear Tire as irrelevant.  This motion is too vague.  For example, reference to other asbestos-containing products could be relevant to notice or knowledge.

            The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

Defendants’ MIL No. 6

            Defendants move to exclude reference to Defendants and their attorneys being involved in the asbestos industry or similar language.  Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is deemed made and granted.  The motion is granted.

The moving party is to give notice.