Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)
THIS COURT MAY EXCLUDE IRRELEVANT AND SUBSTANTIALLY PREJUDICIAL EVIDENCE IN ADVANCE OF TRIAL BY WAY OF A MOTION IN LIMINE
The usual purpose of motions in limine is to preclude the presentation of evidence deemed inadmissible and prejudicial by the moving party. FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & Cos. (1998) 61 Cal. App. 4th 1132, 1168. The Court has the inherent power to grant a motion in limine to exclude any kind of evidence which could be objected to at trial, because said evidence is irrelevant or subject to discretionary exclusion as being unduly prejudicial or a piece of evidence that will mislead the jury. Clemens v. American Warranty Corp. (1987) 193 Cal. App. 3d 444, 451; Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. v. Superior Court (1988) 200 Cal. App. 3d 272, 288. One of the main purposes of motions in limine is to properly narrow the issues for trial and preclude irrelevant evidence from flooding the courtroom. The advantage of such motion is to avoid the obvious futile attempt to “unring the bell” in the event a motion to strike is granted in the proceeding before the Court related primarily to irrelevant and prejudicial evidence. Hyatt v. Sierra Boat Co. (1978) 79 Cal. App. 3d 325, 337.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Evidence Code §350 regulates that only relevant evidence is admissible. This is because relevancy is not an inherent characteristic of evidence but exists as a relation between an item of evidence and a proposition sought to be proved. See McCormick on Evidence, 3rd, § 185. Accordingly, evidence is relevant if it has any tendency in reason to prove or disprove any disputed fact of consequence to the determination of the action. Evidence Code §210.
While a trial court has broad discretion in determining the relevance of evidence, it lacks discretion to admit irrelevant evidence. People v. Scheid (1977) 16 Cal. 4th 1, 13. When determining whether proffered evidence is relevant, it must be considered that relevance is not an inherent characteristic but exists only as a relationship between an item of evidence and a matter properly provable in a case. The burden of demonstrating relevancy is on the party seeking its admission. Here, evidence related to a claim that plaintiff is a “war hero” or derivative thereof, is irrelevant under Evidence Code § 210 as it has no tendency to prove or disprove any disputed fact in this action. (See Part 5 of 6.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.