2017) (explaining why generic motions in limine to exclude “reptile theory” are meritless). Point out to the court that motions in limine exclude evidence, not strategies. Invoking the need for specificity can become particularly important when opposing counsel files a motion in limineseeking to prohibit you from engaging in a particular approach to trial or a set of trial tactics. When opposing counsel simply tracks the language of a rule of evidence and asks the court to adopt it, you should oppose, pointing out that, while of course you have no intent of violating the rule, reaffirmation of the rules of evidence is not a valid purpose for a motion in limine. The purpose of motions in limine is to identify specific testimony and evidence that is off limits at trial. Is the motion sufficiently specific? The single most common defect in motions in limine is that they lack specificity.Sometimes winning an argument is as simple as correctly labeling that argument. Perhaps opposing counsel is trying to get an expert kicked on relevance grounds or Rule 403, but a brief recitation of the Daubertfactors will show the position to be frivolous. A second reason is that you may need to redefine the correct analytical lens for the Court. If you find a motion for summary judgment hiding in an omnibus motion in limine, your first order of business is to check any scheduling orders and see if opposing counsel is trying to weasel out of a timeliness objection. One reason is that dispositive motions and Daubert motions do not always have the same filing deadline as a motion in limine. But sometimes it helps to call a spade a spade. There’s not necessarily anything wrong with framing a Daubert motion as a motion in limine the purpose of both is a pretrial determination as to the admissibility of particular evidence. Is it a motion in limine at all, or just dressed up as one? Sometimes what is framed as a motion in limine is really better defined as something else, such as a motion for summary judgment or a Daubert motion.This article will walk through some frequent weaknesses of novel motions in limine. Most such motions tend to suffer from a common core of defects that can be spotted quickly. But often, the cracks in a motion in limine begin to show well before you are waist-deep in case law. Ultimately, each case-specific motion in limine requires a customized response that includes a persuasive presentation of the facts and an argument based on the best available case law. How to Address Case-Specific Motions in Limine Call Kurt Kastorf for some quick assistance. Under the gun to get some motions in limine responses done? Kastorf Law has seen them all before. The approach for case-specific and other novel motions in limine will vary from that for stock motions. This guide will first provide a roadmap for identifying common flaws in case-specific motions in limine, then provide guidance on addressing stock motions. It is time to identify and draft responses to each motion in limine. Part II addressed how to engage in triage when you’ve received a stack of motions in limine. Part I of this series covered advance preparation for a deluge of motions in limine. Part III: How to Draft Effective Responses to Motions in Limine
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |