Pacheco v. United States

Opinion

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON YESENIA PACHECO, et al., Case No. C15-1175RSL Plaintiffs, ORDER REGARDING v. DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. This matter comes before the Court on “Defendant’s Motion in Limine” regarding the damages phase. Dkt. # 149. Defendant seeks to exclude evidence regarding (a) lost wages or expenses that would ordinarily be incurred as the result of having and raising a child and (b) S.L.P.’s lost future wages or general damages. Having reviewed the submissions of the parties,1 the Court finds as follows: Under Washington law, Ms. Pacheco and Mr. Lemus may “recover those expenses in excess of the cost of the birth and rearing of [a normal child].” Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc., 98 Wn.2d 460, 477 (1983). Both parties are therefore correct: plaintiffs may not recover for lost wages/expenses that would ordinarily be incurred as the result of the birth of a child, but they may recover for the loss of income associated with taking S.L.P. to medical appointments and therapy sessions. 1 The Court has considered plaintiffs’ untimely response and defendant’s reply (which was authorized by the Court’s case management order, Dkt. # 135 at 1). With regards to S.L.P.’s claim, Plaintiffs agree that she is entitled to recover only extraordinary expenses for medical care and special training. Harbeson, 98 Wn.2d at 482. Dated this 1st day of June, 2020. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge