Aidini v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Filing 79

ORDER Denying 42 Motion in Limine regarding argument that plaintiff was in a restricted area. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 4/5/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 *** 4 ARTANO AIDINI, 5 6 7 Case No. 2:15-cv-00505-APG-GWF Plaintiff, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, 8 Defendant. ORDER DENYING MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING ARGUMENT THAT PLAINTIFF WAS IN A RESTRICTED AREA (ECF No. 42) 9 10 Plaintiff Artano Aidini moves to preclude defendant Costco Wholesale Corporation from 11 arguing at trial that Aidini was in a restricted area at the time he fell and broke his ankle. I deny 12 the motion. Costco may make arguments supported by the evidence and there is evidence that the 13 area between the registers where Aidini fell was for employees, not an exit for customers. See 14 Alexander v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 2:11-CV-00752-JCM-PAL, 2013 WL 427132, at *6 (D. 15 Nev. Feb. 1, 2013). Aidini may respond with evidence that there were no signs restricting access, 16 that the area was not blocked off, that Costco employees testified that customers walk through 17 that area, or other relevant evidence. Whether Aidini was contributorily negligent by walking 18 through that area will be a matter for the jury to resolve. 19 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Artano Aidini’s motion in limine to 20 preclude argument that plaintiff was in a restricted area at the time of the incident (ECF No. 42) 21 is DENIED. 22 DATED this 5th day of April, 2017. 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANDREW P. GORDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?