Bottini v. GEICO

Filing 107

ORDER denying 100 Motion for Reconsideration re 99 Order on Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich on 12/19/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit) (JM)

Download PDF
Case 8:13-cv-00365-EAK-AEP Document 28-1 Filed 11/06/13 Page 3 of 63 PagelD 239 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES..................................................................................iii STATEMENT OF THE CASE................................................................................1 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS............................................................................. 2 A. The Accident, UM Coverage, and Settlements............. ........... 2 B. Theories of the Case............................. ............... ...................4 C. Rulings Effecting GEICO’s Liability Expert’s Testimony.............. .............................................................. 6 1, 2. D. Pretrial ruling on inspection o f the engine.......................6 Rulings at trial concerning Swanger’s testimony Plaintiffs “Good v. Evil” Theme And Presentation Of "Bad Character” Evidence As To Geisbert. ................ 8 13 E. Plaintiff’s Value of Life Closing Argument.............................15 F. Agency Instruction that Geisbert and Anita Lloyd Were Responsible for Any Negligence of Tim Lloyd....................... 16 G. The Verdict and Post-Trial Motions....................................... 17 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT................................. .................................. 18 STANDARDS OF REVIEW................................................................................ 21 ARGUMENT.............. ........................................................................................ 22 I. A NEW TRIAL IS REQUIRED BECAUSE THE TRIAL COURT’S ERRONEOUS RULINGS EFFECTING SWANGER’S TESTIMONY DENIED GEICO A FAIR TRIAL............................................................................................... 22 A. Improper Pretrial Restriction On Inspection............................22 I Case 8:13-cv-00365-EAK-AEP Document 28-1 Filed 11/06/13 Page 4 of 63 PagelD 240 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page B. C. Improper Restriction Of Swanger’s Trial Testimony.............. 25 D. II. Improper Refusal To Compel The Return Of The Engine To The Courtroom And Exclusion Of The Engine From Evidence................................................................................. 23 Improper Presentation Of False Testimony To The Jury 28 THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY INSTRUCTING THE JURY THAT GEISBERT AND ANITA LLOYD WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY NEGLIGENCE OF TIM LLOYD AND SENDING A VICARIOUS LIABILITY CLAIM TO THE JURY WHEN SUCH A CLAIM WAS NEVER PLED 32 III. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN FAILING TO GRANT A NEW TRIAL BASED ON PLAINTIFF’S HIGHLY PREJUDICIAL AND INFLAMMATORY CLOSING ARGUMENT, INCLUDING AN IMPROPER VALUE OF LIFE ARGUMENT............................35 IV. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN FAILING TO GRANT A NEW TRIAL BASED ON PLAINTIFF’S CHARACTER ASSASSINATION OF GEISBERT AT TRIAL..................................................................... 39 V. A NEW TRIAL IS REQUIRED BECAUSE THE UNPRECEDENTED $30 MILLION VERDICT IS EXCESSIVE AND AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.............................................................................. 46 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................... 49 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.............................................................................. 50 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.................................................................... 50

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?