Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sanchez v. Hankook Tire Co., Ltd.

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

October 13, 2016

JULIO SANCHEZ, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DANIELA TESTA, deceased, and as Next Friend of INEZ MARIA SANCHEZ, a minor, and JULIO SANCHEZ, JR., a minor, and INELDA GUTIERREZ PRADINES; Plaintiffs,
v.
HANKOOK TIRE CO., LTD.; Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Laurie Smith Camp Chief United States District Judge

         This matter is before the Court on the Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine (ECF No. 67) and Defendant's Motions in Limine (ECF Nos. 68, 70, 72, 77). For the reasons discussed below, the Plaintiffs' motion will be granted in part; the Defendant's motions at ECF Nos. 68 and 72 will be granted; the Defendant's motion at ECF No. 70 will be granted in part; and the parties' request for a hearing on the Defendant's motion at ECF No. 77 will be granted.

         Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine

         Julio Sanchez, as personal representative of the Estate of Daniela Testa, deceased, and as next friend of I.M.S., a minor, A.S., a minor, and J.S.J., a minor, and Inelda Guitierrez Pradines (“Plaintiffs”) move the Court to preclude Defendant Hankook Tire Co., Ltd. (“Hankook”) from presenting evidence or argument in the following categories:

1. Any reference to the filing of the motion in limine, or any ruling on it.
2. The reading or presentation of objections or comments by lawyers made during depositions.
3. Any attacks on the integrity of Plaintiffs' counsel, or reference to alleged improper conduct of counsel during the course of litigation.
4. Any reference to pre-judgment or post-judgment interest on any award of damages, or any suggestion that the award may be increased or enhanced by operation of law.
5. Any attempt to invoke local prejudice against lawyers, parties, or witnesses who are not residents of Nebraska.
6. Any attempt to portray Plaintiffs' experts in a manner that does not fairly depict their appearance at the time of their depositions in this case.
7. Any reference to ownership or use of Hankook tires by fact witnesses, Hankook experts, Hankook employees, or Hankook counsel.
8. Any suggestion that the tire at issue in this case complied with, needed to comply with, or did not need to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.
9. Any suggestion that Hankook was named as Defendant due to its financial ability ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.