Opinion
2:17-cv-00828-DDP-GJS
08-16-2022
KOURTNI NICOLE BEEBE, an individual, Plaintiff, v. NUTRIBULLET, L.L.C., a California Limited Liability Corporation, Defendant.
ORDER RE: MOTIONS IN LIMINE [DKT. 296-298, 302-306, 310-312]
DEAN D. PREGERSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. 1
Presently before the court are motions in limine filed by Plaintiff Kourtni Nicole Beebe (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants NutriBullet, LLC, Capital Brands, LLC, Homeland Housewares, LLC, Call To Action, LLC, and NutriLiving, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”). (Dkt. 296-298, 302-306, 310-312.) Having considered the parties' submissions and heard oral argument, the court adopts the following Order:
Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #1 (Dkt. 304) is GRANTED, in part, insofar as Plaintiff is pursuing a design defect claim exclusively under the consumer expectations test. If Plaintiff pursues or presents evidence of a design defect claim under the risk-benefit test, nothing in this Order shall prevent Defendants from presenting evidence pertaining to that theory. Defendants may introduce evidence describing in general terms, the components of the product and how they fit and work together. Defendants shall not introduce evidence about the risks or benefits of the design, unless, as noted above, Plaintiffs pursue that theory of liability.
Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #2 (Dkt. 305, 306) is GRANTED, in part. Although evidence of the safety history of the product, including the testimony of Dr. Wachs, is relevant to Plaintiff's failure to warn claim, should that claim go forward, such evidence is irrelevant to Plaintiff's design defect claim under the consumer expectations test, and shall not be introduced in relation to that claim. Should Plaintiff pursue her design defect claim under the risk-benefit test, nothing in this Order shall prevent Defendants from presenting such evidence.
Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #3 (Dkt. 310) is DENIED.
Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #4 (Dkt. 311) is DENIED, in part. Dr. Macer's testimony shall be limited to his opinion about Plaintiff's physical injuries. Dr. Macer shall not testify 2 about Plaintiff's alleged mental health issues, including her alleged claim of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Plaintiff's Motion in Limine #5 (Dkt. 312) is DENIED.
Defendants' Motion in Limine #1 (Dkt. 297) is DENIED.
Defendants' Motion in Limine #2 (Dkt. 298) is GRANTED, in part. Plaintiff shall not refer to any prior incidents, complaints, or lawsuits that involve Defendants' products. The court reserves as to the use of prior incidents for purposes of impeachment. Cooper v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 945 F.2d 1103, 1105 (9th Cir. 1991). Plaintiff must obtain leave of the court prior to any such use.
Defendants' Motion in Limine #3 (Dkt. 302) is DENIED, in part. Plaintiff may voire dire Mr. Kitzes outside the presence of the jury before the court makes its final determination as to the admissibility of Mr. Kitzes' testimony. Plaintiff shall not refer to its failure to warn claim before the jury before the court has ruled on the admissibility of Mr. Kitzes' testimony.
Defendants' (SEALED) Motion in Limine #4 (Dkt. 296) is GRANTED.
Defendants' Motion in Limine #5 (Dkt. 303) is RESERVED for trial. Should Plaintiff pursue a claim for punitive damages, Defendants shall be permitted to present evidence, including risk-benefit evidence, general product safety data, and other evidence responsive to that claim. 3
IT IS SO ORDERED. 4