My Photo

About Evan Schaeffer

Blog powered by Typepad

ccl

ga

« A Sample Motion in Limine: Defense Version | Main | Ignore Your Opponent in a Deposition »

April 01, 2004

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d4b53ef00d8345e786253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Sample Motion in Limine: Plaintiff's Version:

Comments

David E. Ortman

RE: Motions in Limine

In Washington state, a MiL is suppose to it describes the evidence objected to with sufficient specificity to enable the trial court to determine that it is clearly inadmissible and the trial court is given a memorandum of authorities showing that the evidence is inadmissible.

How does Illinois get by with just submitting a general list of vague objections to evidence that might or might not be offered?

Perspiring minds want to know.
The granting or denial of a motion in limine is within the discretion of the trial court, subject only to review for abuse. Gammon v. Clark Equip. Co., 38 Wn.App. 274, 286, 686 P.2d 1102 (1984), aff'd, 104 Wn.2d 613, 707 P.2d 685 (1985); Fenimore v. Donald M. Drake Constr. Co., 87 Wash.2d 85, 91, 549 P.2d 483 (1976). The motion should be granted if (1) it describes the evidence objected to with sufficient specificity to enable the trial court to determine that it is clearly inadmissible; (2) the evidence is so prejudicial that the movant should be spared the necessity of calling attention to it by objecting when it is offered; and (3) the trial court is given a memorandum of authorities showing that the evidence is inadmissible. Gammon, 38 Wn.App. at 286-87, 686 P.2d 1102.

State v. Cole, 74 Wn. App. 571, 577, 874 P.2d 878 (1994) (overruled on other grounds)

Evan

David: Only the motion is included in the post. In Illinois, you'd normally file a memorandum in support of the motion as well. In addition to this, the motion would be argued on the record before trial. At the motion hearing, you'd try to do what you do in Washington, i.e., "describe the evidence objected to with sufficient specificity to enable the trial court to determine that it is clearly inadmissible."

David E. Ortman

Thanks and great website, by the way.

In Washington, to take the court literally, it is the motion that must describe the evidence with sufficient specificity, not the memorandum on the motion. Perhaps, each state does this a bit differently. Any help from the FRCP?


"motion should be granted if (1) it describes the evidence objected to with sufficient specificity to enable the trial court to determine that it is clearly inadmissible;"

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

IT'S HERE!

  • A NEW BOOK BY EVAN SCHAEFFER



    How to Feed a Lawyer (and Other Irreverent Observations from the Legal Underground)

    Click on the book cover for details!

Search Trial Practice Tips