Johnson v. Walker

Filing 55

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 36 Defendant's Second Motion in Limine. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on June 10, 2015. (mll)

,­

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

TEXARKANA DIVISION

PLAINTIFF

ANDREA JOHNSON

v.

Case No.4: 14-cv-04078
DEFENDANT

JOHN W. WALKER, P.A.

ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant's Second Motion in Limine. (ECF No. 36). Plaintiff has
responded. (ECF No. 50). This matter is ripe for the Court's consideration. The Motion will be
granted in part and denied in part as follows:
A. AEA Employees - Hearsay
Defendant seeks to preclude Ronnie and Andrea Johnson from testifying about what AEA
employees told the Johnsons regarding Defendant's fee arrangement with the AEA and his
verbal agreement with Plaintiff. Defendant contends that this evidence is improper hearsay.
Plaintiff argues that because Defendant asserts that Plaintiff waived or is estopped from making
her claims, Plaintiff should be able to present this testimony to establish that Plaintiff was
making an effort to resolve her dispute with Defendant, and therefore her claims are not barred
by waiver or estoppel. Defendant's motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
Ronnie and Andrea Johnson may testify that they discussed John Walker's fee arrangement with
AEA employees to establish that Plaintiff was trying to resolve her dispute with Defendant;
however, Ronnie and Andrea Johnson are precluded from testifying about statements made by
AEA employees.

1

B. Frank Hamilton, Mediator - Hearsay
Defendant seeks to preclude testimony from Ronnie Johnson about statements made by John
Walker and Frank Hamilton, the mediator. Plaintiff argues that because Defendant asserts that
Plaintiff waived or is estopped from making her claims, Plaintiff should be able to present this
testimony to establish that Plaintiff was making an effort to resolve her dispute with Defendant,
and therefore her claims are not barred by waiver or estoppel.

Defendant's motion is

GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Ronnie and Andrea Johnson may testify that
they discussed John Walker's fee arrangement with John Walker and Frank Hamilton to
establish that Plaintiff was trying to resolve her dispute with Defendant; however, Ronnie and
Andrea Johnson are precluded from testifying about statements made by John Walker and Frank
Hamilton in that discussion.
C. Ronnie and Andrea Johnson - Hearsay
Defendant seeks to exclude testimony from Ronnie Johnson about statements he made to
Plaintiff after he heard about the contingency fee arrangement with Defendant.

Plaintiff

contends that this is not hearsay. The Court disagrees that Ronnie Johnson's statements made to
Plaintiff after he heard about the contingency fee are not hearsay. These statements are out-of­
court statements that would be offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Accordingly,
Defendant's motion is GRANTED. Ronnie Johnson is prohibited from testifying about what he
said to his wife after he discovered the contingency fee arrangement.
D. Ronnie Johnson's Inflammatory References to Criminal Acts
Defendant seeks to preclude Ronnie Johnson or any other witness from testifying that John
Walker committed a "criminal act." In his deposition, Ronnie Johnson testified that it was his
opinion that John Walker's actions were criminal. Plaintiff does not object to Defendant's

2

request. Thus, Defendant's motion is GRANTED. The parties and witnesses are prohibited
from testifying that John Walker committed a "criminal act."
For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that Defendant's Second Motion in Limine
(ECF No. 36) should be and hereby is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 10th day of June, 2015.

lsi Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

3