Opinion
HOUSC-CV 2015-016
12-15-2017
BILLIE JO DAVIS PLAINTIFF v. JENNIE OUELLETTE DEFENDANT
ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINES
Defendant has filed two Motions in Limine regarding the pending jury trial scheduled to commence February 21, 2018. Telephonic hearing was held on the motions on December 15, 2017 at which counsel for both Plaintiff and Defendant participated.
By the first motion filed October 11, 2016, Defendant seeks to exclude evidence and opinions that the Plaintiffs condition of fibromyalgia was caused or exacerbated by the accident. Plaintiff initially objected to the motion. But Plaintiff has since indicated she has no doctors or experts to testify to that condition. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion in Limine filed October 11, 2016 is granted and Plaintiff will not be allowed to offer any evidence that her fibromyalgia condition was caused or exacerbated by the accident Similarly, with no doctors or experts to address the issue, Plaintiff is prohibited from introducing at trial any medical evidence, treatment records or bills related to fibromyalgia. Plaintiff may testify at trial to her condition generally, both pre-accident and post-accident, as it relates to her condition, but may not offer any evidence that the condition was caused or exacerbated by the accident.
By the second motion filed November 14, 2017 Defendant seeks to exclude any expert testimony offered by the Plaintiff due to Plaintiffs failure to file complete expert witness designations in compliance with Rule 26(b). At an early point in the litigation, Plaintiff did submit a designation that identified potential expert witnesses including doctors and a certified public accountant. But those designations did not adequately identify the facts to which the experts would testify and were otherwise non-compliant with Rule 26(b). Subsequently, Plaintiff has indicated she does not intend to have any doctors testify. As for the certified public accountant, there remains no sufficient designation. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion in Limine filed November 14, 2017 is also granted and Plaintiff is prohibited by offering or presenting at trial any expert testimony, including doctors or accountants.
Remaining at issue is what medical records and bills Plaintiff may introduce at trial. In short, Plaintiff may offer records and bills that are admissible pursuant to and in accordance with 16 M, R.S.A. §357 and Rule 803(6) of the Maine Rules of Evidence, subject to relevancy and reasonableness of the charges. Plaintiffs counsel is encouraged to submit to the Defendant's counsel copies of medical and treatment records and bills which Plaintiff intends to offer at trial. It is anticipated Defendant's counsel will review those records and bills and respond to Plaintiffs counsel identifying items which are objectionable, based (in relevancy, and reasonableness and necessity of the treatment and charges. Counsel are advised to complete that exchange two (2) weeks before trial so at commencement of trial counsel may articulate to the court-the records and bills in dispute and in need of ruling by the court.