Judge Ronald F. Frank, Case Number: 19TRCV00871, Date: 2023-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 19TRCV00871, Date: 2023-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19TRCV00871 Hearing Date: August 18, 2023 Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling

HEARING DATE: August 18, 2023

CASE NUMBER: 19TRCV00871

CASE NAME: Donald Baxter v. Alvin Pittman

MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Alvin Pittman

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Donald Baxter

TRIAL DATE: August 28, 2023

MOTIONS:¿ Motion in Limine to Exclude Plaintiff’s Expert From Testifying on Certain Issues

Tentative Ruling: DENY w/o prejudice to a timely objection if, as, and when a witness is offered or an exhibit is offered into evidence that opposing counsel believes would be subject to this MIL. There is nothing in the Motion to enable the Court to identify any specific testimony for which exclusion is sought. A proper motion in limine can serve the function of a “motion to exclude” under Evidence Code section 353 by allowing the Court to rule in advance on a specific objection to particular evidence, but unless the motion specifies exactly what evidence is the subject of the motion, the motion should be denied until that evidence is offered at trial and an objection can then be made to a specific exhibit or specific question of a witness. (Kelly v. New West Federal Savings (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 659, 671.)

Plaintiff’s Opposition indicates that expert witness Michael Farley has not been deposed, which would explain why there are no specific references to the expected testimony sought to be excluded.

The Court notes that on September 3, 2020, Judge Hill issued an order regarding trial and Final Status Conference requirements. As of August 17, 2023, the day before the FSC, it appears both sides are not ready for the FSC nor the requested jury trial. There are no joint trial documents filed, i.e., a joint exhibit list, a joint witness list, proposed jury instructions, proposed verdict forms, a joint short statement of the case, exhibit binders, proposed voir dire questions, etc. There is a designation of the videotaped deposition of Dr. Chang and a notice of intent to pay the videotape at trial.