Simoneaux v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company

Filing 46

RULING denying 41 Motion in Limine to Limit Evidence Regarding Alleged Damages. Signed by Judge James J. Brady on 1/16/2014. (SMG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
JEFFREY M. SIMONEAUX
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
NO. 11-506-JJB-SCR
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY
RULING ON MOTION IN LIMINE
This matter is before the court on the Defendant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company’s
Motion (doc. 41) in Limine to Limit Evidence Regarding Alleged Damages. Plaintiff Jeffrey M.
Simoneaux has opposed the motion. (Doc. 45). Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Oral
argument is not necessary.
In its motions, the defendant seeks a time-period limitation on the plaintiff’s arguments,
evidence, and testimony regarding the alleged damages resulting from the plaintiff not being
promoted to a supervisory position. The defendant wants to limit such arguments, evidence, and
testimony regarding front pay damages to a period of five years, based on its belief that the Fifth
Circuit limits front pay damages to only five years. Upon review, the court finds that the Fifth
Circuit has not provided such a limitation.
In Deloach v. Delchamps, Inc., the Fifth Circuit did not set a five-year limitation,
contrary to what the defendant contends. 897 F.2d 815. Rather, the Fifth Circuit looked at the
facts of that particular case and found that front pay damages for a period of five years was
appropriate. See id. at 822. Accordingly, a district court can award front pay damages for any
amount of time that it deems appropriate based on a consideration of relevant factors. As there
does not appear to be any five-year limitation, this Court refuses to limit the plaintiff’s evidence,
arguments, or testimony to such a period.
1

Nonetheless, it must be emphasized that the court is neither holding nor otherwise
suggesting that it will make an award of front pay damages for any particular period of time. The
present ruling merely provides that the plaintiff will not be limited to a five-year period in his
presentation of evidence, testimony, and arguments.
Therefore, for the reasons stated, the court DENIES the Motion (doc. 41) in Limine to
Limit Evidence Regarding Alleged Damages.
Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on January 16, 2014.





JUDGE JAMES J. BRADY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

2