Valeriani v. Prevost

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 22, 2014
DocketCUMcv-13-181
StatusUnpublished

This text of Valeriani v. Prevost (Valeriani v. Prevost) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Valeriani v. Prevost, (Me. Super. Ct. 2014).

Opinion

Ell I ( RED AUG n 6 1014

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, ss CIVIL ACTION Docket No. CV-13-181

TIMOTHY VALERIANI, 1\Jb~- CM/ytl 0'7- ~ ~-1 L} C STAT£o urnberJand F MAIN£ Plaintiff SUpE.Ri~sR, Clerk's ok,· ,, couRT "Ice v. JUL 2 2 2014 ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE JOANN PREVOST, RtcttVto Defendant

After argument on the record on the parties' motions in limine, the following is

ordered:

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE UNCORRECTED PORTIONS OF HER

DEPOSITION TESTIMONY; PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE REFERENCE TO

STIPULATION OF LIABILITY

The parties agree to stipulate to liability, which in this case means defendant's

negligence proximately caused some injury to plaintiff. Defendant will not testify.

Counsel are permitted to reference the fact of this stipulation in opening statements and

closing arguments.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE REFERENCE TO DR. KAZILIONIS'S TWO

REPRIMANDS

The motion is granted.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE SUBSTANTIVE ADMISSION OF,

OR ILLUSTRATNE USE OR REFERENCE TO, PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 29

Plaintiff may testify with regard to the assertions in the Quantification of Lost

Wages dated 10/16/13. Plaintiff's counsel will not use plaintiff's exhibit 29 during his

opening statement. Depending on plaintiff's testimony, use of plaintiff's exhibit 29 may be permitted during plaintiff's testimony and/ or plaintiff's closing argument.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE PHOTOGRAPHS OF DEFENDANT'S

VEHICLE

The motion is denied. State v. Hurd does not address the issue of the

relationship between force and resulting injury addressed in the cases cited by plaintiff.

See State v. Hurd, 360 A.2d 525, 527-28, 527 n.S (Me. 1976); see, ~ Mason v. Lynch,

878 A.2d 588, 600-01 (Md. 2005); Brennan v. Demello, 921 A.2d 1110, 1118-19 (N.J.

2007).

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PRECLUDE DR. KAZILIONIS'S TESTIMONY ON THE

SUBJECT OF BIOMECHANCS

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO LIMIT NUMBER OF PAIN AND SUFFERING

WITNESSES

The court defers ruling until trial.

The clerk is directed to incorporate this order into the docket by reference.

Date: -J/z¢1-

2 DEBORAH BUCCINA ESQ DOUGLAS DENHAM BUCCINA & ERNST PO BOX 7108 PORTLAND ME 04112-7108

\

WILLIAM ROBITZEK ESQ BERMAN & SIMMONS PO BOX 961 LEWISTON ME 04243-0961

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Hurd
360 A.2d 525 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1976)
Brenman v. Demello
921 A.2d 1110 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2007)
Mason v. Lynch
878 A.2d 588 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Valeriani v. Prevost, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valeriani-v-prevost-mesuperct-2014.