Amrani v. United States of America

Filing 210

ORDER denying 185 Motion in Limine. See PDF document. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 12/9/14.(JWS) .

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Jacob Amrani,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

10
Plaintiff,

11
vs.

12
13

United States of America,

14

Defendant.

15

2:12-cv-2583 JWS
ORDER AND OPINION
[Re: Motion at docket 185]

16

I. MOTION PRESENTED

17

At docket 185 plaintiff Jacob Amrani (“Dr. Amrani”) asks that defendant “be

18

precluded from asserting a defense of assumption of risk.”1 Defendant United States of

19
20
21

America (“United States”) opposes at docket 191. No reply has been filed. Oral
argument would not assist the court.
II. DISCUSSION

22
23
24

Motions in limine are motions which seek to exclude evidence. As the United
States points out in its briefing, the Supreme Court has said that motions in limine are

25
motions “whether made before or during trial, to exclude anticipated prejudicial
26
27
28

1

Doc. 185 at p. 1.

1
2
3

evidence before the evidence is actually offered.”2 The motion at docket 185 does not
ask the court to exclude evidence that Dr. Amrani assumed a risk relating to the surgery
performed on him by explaining why particular evidence (such as that discussed in the

4
5

United States’ response at docket 191) should be ex cluded. Instead, the motion asks

6

the court to rule that regardless of what evidence might be offered at trial, the defense

7

of assumption of risk may not be asserted. In other words, the motion at docket 185 is

8

actually a motion for partial summary judgment asking the court to rule that as a matter

9
10

of law, the defense fails. However, the time for filing summary judgment motions ran on
August 22, 2014. 3 The motion at docket 185 was not filed until October 23, 2014.

11
12

The court will deny the motion at docket 185, because it is an untim ely motion for

13

summary judgment. Of course, that is not to say that the court will permit the United

14

States to introduce any particular evidence at trial. What evidence, if any, will be

15

admitted relating to the assumption of risk defense pled by the United States will be

16

taken up at trial and resolved using the customary objection and offer of proof process.

17
III. CONCLUSION

18
19
20

For the reasons above, the motion at docket 185 is DENIED.
DATED this 9th day of December 2014.

21
/s/ JOHN W. SEDWICK
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26

2

27

3

28

Doc. 191 at pp. 1-2 (quoting Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38, 40 n.2 (1984)).
Order at docket 142.

2