Judge: Laura A. Seigle, Case: BC676456, Date: 2022-08-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC676456    Hearing Date: August 29, 2022    Dept: 15

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

            At the August 22, 2022 Final Status Conference, the Court stated that no defense motions in limine appeared in the court file, and remined the parties that providing courtesy copies of documents is not equivalent to filing the documents.  The Court directed Defendant to file its motions in limine and Plaintiff to file any responses by August 24, 2022.  Thereafter, Defendant filed MIL No. 8.  That is the only MIL Defendant has filed and therefore the only MIL on which the Court rules below.

Defendant’s MIL No. 8

            Defendant seeks to exclude arguments that “there is no safe dose “of asbestos and “any exposure” is enough to cause disease.  This motion is too vague, and Plaintiffs state they do not intend to rely on the argument that every fiber causes cancer. 

The motion appears to extend beyond these specific phrases by also trying to limit the arguments about the standard for proving causation and what “substantial factor” means.  Under the July 8, 2022 CMO, motions to exclude expert opinion about the term “substantial factor” are deemed made and denied without prejudice to objections at trial.  Defendant did not show good cause to depart from this order.

The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial.

The moving party is to give notice.