Sample Motions in Limine
We have gone through and culled together a number of motions in limine that we have filed in our cases. These may be of assistance to you should you be presented with an issue similar to the one presented in our case.
Because of the difficulties in transferring the documents from WordPerfect to Microsoft Word to the website, the layout of the document may look different than it actually appeared and some of the wording may have been doctored in the translation. We may also have deleted the name of the client, court or witnesses in certain instances for the purposes of confidentially. (Some of our clients have also graciously agreed to allow us to include their names.) The substance of the motions, however, have remained generally intact.
Miller & Zois is committed to the continued education of other personal injury attorneys who are fighting on behalf of injured clients. If you have any motions that you believe would be of assistance to other attorneys representing injured victims, please forward them to us and we will, if appropriate, put the up here.
You can also find other sample motions in tort cases and even more motions in limine here.
Expert Related Motions in Limine
- Exclude Cumulative Expert Testimony: defense counsel - malpractice lawyers in particular - love to put on multiple experts to say the exact same thing
- Preclude Defendant's Experts
- Exclude Opinion Testimony
- Stop Doctor from Testifying as an Expert
- Response to Motion in Limine to Exclude/Limit Expert's Opinion
Other Motions in Limine
- Opposition to Motion in Limine to Allow Defendants to Not Identify the Uninsured Motorist Carrier
- Subsequent Remedial Measures
- Fact Witness
- Evidence Relating to Plaintiff's Arrest
- Evidence of Plaintiff's Abuse (and Lies About) the Use of Prescription Drugs
- Exclude Unsupported Documentation of Machine Readings
- Activities of Plaintiff After the Relevant Events in the Case
- Property Damage to the Vehicles
- Type of Motorcycle in the Collision
- Other Parties Sued
- Consent Form in Malpractice Claim
- Defendant's Response [Select here]
- Prevent Defendant from Proffering Inconsistent Evidence at Trial
- Exclude Prior Safe Use of the Product
- Malpractice Claim to Exclude Prior Lawsuits Against Doctor
- Exclude Lies and Other Bad Acts Related to the Use of Prescription Drugs as a Result of a Truck Accident
- Contents of Decedent's Will in a Wrongful Death/Survival Action Car Accident Case
- Ad Damnum Clause
- Preclude Defendant's Experts
Thoughts on Motions in Limine in Maryland
The phrase in limine in Latin means "on the threshold." Motions in limine are used to prohibit or limit certain testimony or evidence at trial. A motion in limine in a personal injury case is a motion typically made before trial starts, but can be made at any time before or during a trial.
In most courts, lawyers must file any motion within fifteen days before trial. Many judges view motions in limine as a form of preliminary injunction. In other words, the moving party would be irreparably harmed by waiting for an in-trial objection - after the cat is already out of the bag in a sense.
Consequently, the standard in Maryland for granting such relief is whether any reference to the evidence the moving party seeks to exclude is so prejudicial that the nonmoving party may not make reference to it. This is particularly important if you do not want to the defense counsel referencing the evidence at issue in defendant's opening statement (where objection is more difficult).
Lawyers must also remain mindful of the scope of the relief sought and should reflect that request in a draft order for the trial court's signature. It is important that the order contain language that is narrowly tailored to the inappropriate evidence. Judges are reticent to exclude broad categories of evidence but may be more reception to a more narrow request.
If you are on the losing side of the court's ruling to exclude evidence it is important to remember that, unlike many judicial orders, orders in limine are interlocutory and not final rulings on the admissibility of evidence. Accordingly, it is not inappropriate to request a reversal or modification of a prior ruling, particularly if the request is based on a different presentation of evidence than the trial court was led to believe would be presented. In fact, these arguments often need to be raised again because a denial does not always preserve the record for appeal, particularly if the argument is the judge's chambers.
More Samples in Malpractice, Products and Car Accident Cases
- Take a look at settlement demand packages
- Help Page: get templates for anything and everything related to malpractice and motor tort cases