Rhyne et al v. United States Steel Corporation et al
Filing
402
ORDER granting 281 Motion in Limine; denying 284 Motion in Limine; granting 286 Motion in Limine; granting 288 Motion in Limine; granting 290 Motion in Limine; denying 292 Motion in Limine; denying 294 Mot ion in Limine; granting 296 Motion in Limine; denying 299 Motion in Limine; denying 301 Motion in Limine; denying 303 Motion in Limine; granting 315 Motion in Limine; deferring ruling on 317 Motion in Limine; denying 321 Motion i n Limine; deferring ruling on 323 Motion in Limine; deferring ruling on 329 Motion in Limine; denying 335 Motion in Limine; denying 347 Motion in Limine; granting 352 Motion in Limine; denying 354 Motion in Limine; granting 357 Mo tion for Order Resolving Admissibility Issues Regarding Certain US Steel-Related Exhibits Prior to Start of Trial XXXXX; deferring ruling on 361 MOTION for Order Resolving Admissibility Issues Regarding Savogran-Related Exhibits. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 9/14/20. (clc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:18-cv-00197-RJC-DSC
BRUCE RHYNE & JANICE RHYNE
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES STEEL
CORPORATION, et al.
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on a combination of Plaintiffs’ and
Defendants’ motions in limine. (Doc. Nos. 281, 284, 286, 315, 317, 323, 329, 335, 347, 352,
354, 357, 361; 288, 290, 292, 294, 296, 299, 301, 303; and 321, respectively.) In the
interests of providing the parties with the Court’s rulings ahead of trial, the Court below
lists the parties’ relevant motions by docket number, all docket numbers associated with
the motion, a summary of the request in the motion, and the Court’s ruling on the motion.
Plaintiffs’ Motions in Limine
Doc. Nos.
281
282
367
399
Request
Request: Defendants should be excluded
from arguing/testifying that Bruce Rhyne
was negligent in his use of Liquid Wrench
based on the product’s flammability.
Decision
284
285
Request: Defendants should be excluded from DENIED
arguing/testifying that there was any radiation
at the Duke site or that Bruce Rhyne had
radiation exposure and worked at a nuclear
power plant, and all evidence of radiation and
nuclear power should be excluded.
286
287
390
Request: Defendants should be precluded
from arguing/testifying/introducing evidence
about any payments to Plaintiffs from a
1
GRANTED
GRANTED
collateral source. (This motion is not
intended to raise issues as to any post-verdict
offsets.)
315
316
368
398
Request: Plaintiffs should be allowed to
introduce specific Mobil documents
concerning the benzene content of Liquid
Wrench as well as related testimonial excerpts
on the same topic.
317
318
379
381
Request: Plaintiff asks that Defendants be
precluded from introducing evidence or in
any way arguing a list of points. (Parties have
since reached agreement for many such
requests.) The remaining unresolved requests
ask that Defendants not be allowed to discuss:
GRANTED
(Provided that Expert
Relied on the
Document)
References as to financial status of
Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s witnesses
(including debts, income,
unemployment, or government
assistance).
(Reserve Ruling)
Questioning whether Plaintiff’s
witnesses believe that Defense
witnesses are honorable or credible.
(Reserve Ruling)
(Reserve Ruling)
References to pleadings that have
been superseded, including arguments
about Plaintiff’s prior dismissed
claims.
Evidence about Plaintiff’s unrelated
prior or subsequent claims.
(Reserve Ruling)
Insinuation that the claims are
‘lawyer-made’ claims or were
generated by counsel.
(Reserve Ruling)
Suggestions of reduced damages
based on conduct of non-parties.
(Reserve Ruling)
References to Rhyne having unrelated DENIED
injuries, disease, or illness.
Any apology or offer of condolences
by Defendants.
2
DENIED
323
324
380
Request: Defendant Savogran’s 28th
(Reserve Ruling)
Affirmative Defense should be struck, and the
jury should be prevented from hearing
whether employer negligence joined and
concurred with Defendants’ negligence in
producing any injury.
329
330
385
Request: The Court should prevent
Defendants from presenting evidence about
workers’ compensation claims and
settlements.
(Reserve Ruling)
335
336
370
389
347
348
386
Request: Defendants should be precluded
from introducing or making references to the
Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA).
DENIED
Request: Defendants should be precluded
from introducing evidence of courts’ prior
exclusion of Plaintiff’s expert witnesses.
DENIED
352
353
378
Request: The Court should allow certain paid GRANTED
medical expenses into evidence for the
purposes of trial.
354
355
377
Request: The Court should preclude the
report and all testimony by Defendants’
expert witness Dominik Alexander as a ‘net
opinion’ under Rule 702.
357
372
Request: Plaintiff asks the Court to resolve
admissibility issues as to certain exhibits prior
to trial:
PTE 104
PTE 105
PTE 106
PTE 118
PTE 120
PTE 125
PTE 126
PTE 127
DENIED
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
EXCLUDED
(Except Impeachment)
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
3
PTE 212
PTE 220
PTE 116
PTE 117
PTE 217
PTE 128
PTE 129
PTE 130
PTE 131
PTE 132
PTE 133
PTE 246
PTE 247
PTE 248
PTE 249
PTE 250
PTE 251
PTE 252
PTE 253
PTE 254
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
CONDITIONALLY
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
4
361
362
ADMITTED
(Limited to Punitive
Damages)
PTE 255
Request: Plaintiffs are asking to enter certain
exhibits into evidence relating to Defendant
Savogran. These exhibits are:
ADMITTED
ADMITTED
ADMITTED
ADMITTED
(Reserve Ruling)
(Reserve Ruling)
(Reserve Ruling)
PTE 302
PTE 304
PTE 309
PTE 349
PTE 350
PTE 316
PTE 315
Defendant U.S. Steel’s Motions in Limine
Doc. Nos.
288
289
382
Request
Request: Plaintiffs should be precluded from
introducing evidence/testimony about other
toxic tort litigation involving any of the
Defendants in this case, and from soliciting
opinions from witnesses concerning those
cases.
Decision
GRANTED
290
291
375
Request: The Court should exclude any of
U.S. Steel’s Material Safety Data Sheets
(‘MSDS’) for benzene dated after April 1978
from evidence, as well as any
testimony/statements/inferences about such
MSDSs after such date.
GRANTED
292
293
365
395
Request: Plaintiffs should be precluded from DENIED
introducing any evidence/testimony/argument
that is contrary to Plaintiffs’ prior judicial
admissions before the Court of Common
Pleas (PA) regarding the sophistication of
Radiator Specialty Company and its
knowledge about potential dangers of benzene
and raffinate.
294
295
384
Request: Defendant makes several requests
regarding U.S. Steel’s corporate library: that
documents from this library be excluded as
hearsay, that any such AML-related
documents accompany a limiting instruction
explaining that the documents only show that
5
DENIED
(Will Consider
Limiting Instruction
at Trial)
U.S. Steel had the documents in their
possession, and that any non-AML-related
documents be excluded as not relevant.
296
297
388
Request: No parties should be able testify,
argue, or reference this trial as being the first
civil jury trial in the District during COVID,
or discuss the decision to proceed to trial
during the pandemic.
GRANTED
299
300
364
393
Request: The ‘Motor Cleaning Document,’
which discusses the potential hazards of
solvents (including benzene) when cleaning
industrial motors in steel mills, should be
excluded from evidence.
DENIED
301
302
376
Request: The ‘Mobil Document’ and all
references to it should be excluded from
evidence, and if so, the deposition of Dr.
Mehlan should also be excluded.
DENIED
(If Relied Upon by
Expert)
303
304
383
394
Request: The ‘Gary Steel Works’ document,
and testimony/statements/inferences
regarding the document, should be excluded
from evidence.
DENIED
Defendant Savogran’s Motion in Limine
Doc. Nos.
321
373
Request
Decision
Request: The Court should exclude certain
DENIED
past testimony from Mark Monique, president
of Savogran.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: September 14, 2020
6
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?