Howard v. Offshore Liftboats, LLC et al

Filing 661

ORDER AND REASONS granting 473 Motion in Limine to exclude evidence regarding Captain Tim Lawrences criminal history with respect to his convictions for domestic abuse and child pornography. Signed by Judge Susie Morgan on 1/19/2016. (Reference: All Cases)(bwn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
CALVIN HOWARD, ET AL.

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 13-4811
c/w 13-6407 and 14-1188

OFFSHORE LIFTBOATS, LLC,
ET AL.

SECTION "E" (5)

ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is a motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding Captain Tim
Lawrence’s criminal history with respect to his convictions for domestic abuse and child
pornography. 1 The motion was filed by Offshore Liftboats, LLC (“OLB”), and is opposed
by Plaintiffs Calvin Howard and Raymond Howard. 2 For the reasons that follow, the
motion in limine is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
This is a maritime personal injury case. It is undisputed that, on May 16, 2013,
Plaintiffs Raymond Howard (“Raymond”) and Calvin Howard (“Calvin”) were injured
during a personnel-basket transfer from the M/V Contender to the deck of the L/B Janie. 3
At the time of the accident, both Raymond and Calvin were employed by Offshore
Liftboats, LLC, the owner and/or operator of the L/B Janie. 4 The M/V Contender was
owned and/or operated by K&K Offshore, LLC. 5 As a result of the accident, both Raymond
and Calvin filed suit against, among others, Offshore Liftboats, LLC—their Jones Act
employer—and K&K Offshore, LLC.

R. Doc. 473.
See R. Doc. 554.
3 See generally R. Doc. 321.
4 See R. Doc. 321.
5 See R. Doc. 321.
1

2

1

On January 6, 2016, OLB filed the present motion in limine to exclude evidence of
Captain Tim Lawrence’s criminal history. 6 Specifically, OLB seeks to preclude any party
from introducing any evidence of Captain Lawrence’s prior convictions for domestic
abuse and child pornography. 7 It is this motion that is presently before the Court.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
A. DOMESTIC-ABUSE CONVICTION
OLB first contends evidence of Captain Lawrence’s conviction for domestic abuse
should be excluded pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 609(a)(1) and 403. 8 Plaintiffs
represent, however, that they do not intend to introduce any evidence with respect to
Captain Lawrence’s conviction for domestic abuse. 9 The motion is granted with respect
to this conviction. Plaintiffs may not introduce evidence of Captain Lawrence’s domesticabuse conviction at trial.
B. CHILD-PORNOGRAPHY CONVICTION
Plaintiffs do intend to use evidence of Captain Lawrence’s child-pornography
conviction for impeachment purposes at trial. 10 Plaintiffs have identified two pieces of
evidence they wish to use: (1) excerpts from Captain Lawrence’s deposition; 11 and (2)
excerpts from Captain Lawrence’s employment application with OLB. 12 The Court now
addresses whether Plaintiffs may introduce this evidence at trial.
OLB concedes that evidence of Captain Lawrence’s felony child-pornography
conviction is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 609, subject to its admissibility
R. Doc. 473.
R. Doc. 473-2 at 1–2.
8 R. Doc. 473-2 at 3.
9 R. Doc. 554 at 2 n.1. Plaintiffs have indicated they will redact any references to Captain Lawrence’s
conviction for domestic abuse in any evidence they introduce with respect to his other convictions, which
the Court addresses below.
10 R. Doc. 554 at 2.
11 R. Doc. 554-1.
12 R. Doc. 554-2.
2
6
7

under Rule 403. 13 Rule 609(a) states that evidence of a witness’s felony conviction “must
be admitted, subject to Rule 403, in a civil case” when offered to attack that witness’s
character. 14 Rule 609(b) places limits on this rule if “more than 10 years have passed since
the witness’s conviction or release from confinement” for that conviction. 15 OLB
acknowledges Rule 609(b) does not apply to Captain Lawrence’s child-pornography
conviction, as Captain Lawrence was released from confinement for that conviction less
than 10 years ago. 16 As a result, Captain Lawrence’s conviction for child pornography is
admissible for impeachment purposes under Rule 609, subject to its admissibility under
Rule 403.
Rule 403 provides, in pertinent part, that the court “may exclude evidence if its
probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of . . . unfair prejudice.” 17 OLB
argues, pursuant to Rule 403, that the probative value of Captain Lawrence’s felony childpornography conviction is “very low” and is substantially outweighed by a danger of
undue prejudice. 18 According to OLB, “the probative value of such a crime is
tremendously low as it says nothing about Lawrence’s competence as a captain or the facts
and circumstances of this personnel basket transfer.” 19 Moreover, OLB contends “the very
nature of the crime gives rise to a substantial risk that the jury will look unfavorably upon
Lawrence simply based on the previous conviction.” 20 The Court agrees with OLB.
Captain Lawrence was convicted of possessing child pornography over 10 years ago in
late-2015. 21 And Captain Lawrence was released from confinement for that conviction
R. Doc. 554 at 2.
FED. R. EVID. 609(a)(1)(A).
15 FED. R. EVID. 609(b).
16 R. Doc. 473-2 at 3.
17 FED. R. EVID. 403.
18 R. Doc. 473-2 at 3–4.
19 R. Doc. 473-2 at 4.
20 R. Doc. 473-2 at 4.
21 See R. Doc. 554 at 2; R. Doc. 554-1 at 8 (Deposition of Timothy Lawrence).
3
13

14

almost 10 years ago, a mere two-months short of the 10-month threshold which would
have triggered the application of Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b). 22 Moreover, the Court
notes that Captain Lawrence’s conviction for the possession of child pornography is not
one that involves dishonesty or the making of false statements and which may raise
questions with respect to his propensity to tell the truth. Lastly, Captain Lawrence’s childpornography conviction does not involve conduct that is even remotely similar to any
conduct at issue in this case. In sum, the probative value of this conviction is minimal.
The Court has broad discretion in determining “whether to allow or disallow use
of a conviction based upon whether its probative value exceeds its prejudicial effect.” 23
For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that any probative value which Captain
Lawrence’s child-pornography conviction may have is substantially outweighed by the
danger of unfair prejudice. Plaintiffs may not introduce evidence of Captain Lawrence’s
child-pornography conviction at trial.
CONCLUSION
IT IS ORDERED that OLB’s motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding
Captain Tim Lawrence’s criminal history be and hereby is GRANTED, as set forth above.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this 19th day of January, 2016.
__________ _ _______ __ _______
SUSIE MORGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

R. Doc. 554 at 2; R. Doc. 554-1 at 9 (Deposition of Timothy Lawrence).
Howard v. Gonzales, 658 F.2d 352, 359 (5th Cir. 1981) (citing Shingleton v. Armor Velvet Corp., 621
F.2d 180, 183 (5th Cir. 1980)).
4
22
23