Wilks v. BNSF Railway Company
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kimberly E. West granting 142 Motion in Limine. (adw, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY,
Case No. CIV-18-080-KEW
O R D E R
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant’s Second
Motion in Limine (Docket Entry #142).
Defendant BNSF Railway
Company (“BNSF”) seeks to preclude Dr. James Stauffer, one of
Plaintiff’s treating physicians, from offering medical causation
opinions “which are beyond the scope of his medical expertise.”
Defendant’s First Motion in Limine.
In that Order, this Court
recognized that a treating physician is not required to file an
expert report in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C).
Additionally, a treating physician may only offer an opinion on
causation only ‘“to the limited extent that opinions about the
cause of an injury are a necessary part of a patient's treatment.”
Starling v. Union Pac. R. Co., 203 F.R.D. 468, 479 (D. Kan. 2001);
see also Richard v. Hinshaw, 2013 WL 6709674, at *2 (D. Kan. Dec.
18, 2013) (“[M]atters within the scope of [treating physician's]
treatment may include opinions about causation, diagnosis, and
prognosis”); Trejo v. Franklin, 2007 WL 2221433, at *1 (D. Colo.
treatment of the patient” are proper under Rule 26(a)(2)(C)).’
Wright v. BNSF Ry. Co., 2016 WL 1183135, *2 (N.D. Okla. Mar. 28,
BNSF also seeks to limit Dr. Stauffer’s opinions on issue of
the mechanism of injury being a family practitioner rather than an
Since Dr. Stauffer referred Plaintiff out
to Dr. Rodgers for treatment of her orthopedic problems in her
back and to Dr. Martucci for pain management of the condition, it
is difficult to conceive of how he could form an opinion on
causation for the injuries that she suffered since it was not
connected to her treatment by him.
As a result, Dr. Stauffer’s
deposition testimony shall be redacted so that the opinions he
provided on causation are removed for presentation to the jury.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Second Motion in
Limine (Docket Entry #142) is hereby GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of March, 2021.
KIMBERLY E. WEST
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?