Case Name: Robert L. Rangel v Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Date Decided: August 25, 2009
Court: U.S.D.C. Nebraska
Judge: Judge Strom
Citation: 2009 WL 2710139

Background:
Plaintiff, Robert L. Rangel, (“Rangel”), filed an action pursuant to the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”), defendant, Union Pacific Railroad (“UP”) has filed a two separate motions in limine. Robert L. Rangel (“Rangel”) has filed a motion in limine to strike the testimony of defendant’s expert.

The motions have been filed prior to trial.

Issue:
Did the Court grant defendant’s and/or plaintiff’s motions in limine to exclude expert testimony?

Held:
UP filed motions in limine to exclude, testimony of plaintiff’s expert and formal ergonomics program.

Rangel’s claimed injuries are limited to a shoulder injury, the testimony of the expert as it relates to ergonomic programs must be limited to such programs that relate to a shoulder injury sustained by the plaintiff.

The Court ordered the jury to preclude testimony that was not relevant to the shoulder injury. Moreover, the Court found that Rangel’s expert was not qualified to testify to medical causation and was permitted to testify as to the proximate cause of any injury sustained by Rangel.

However, because both parties agreed that the experts were qualified ergonomic experts. Accordingly this Court held that any further rulings of this Court with respect to their testimony will have to be reserved until the trial of the action.

Comment:
A motion in limine can be made prior to the start of trial to exclude evidence introduced by either  the plaintiff or the defendant.

Motions in limine are heard before a judge and not in front of a jury so evidence introduced that is excluded by the motion is never heard or seen by the jury.

Steve Gordon
http://www.Gordon-Elias.com