RHOADS INDUSTRIES, INC. et al v. TRITON MARINE CONSTRUCTION CORP.
Filing
223
ORDER THAT THE PARTIES' MOTIONS IN LIMINE ARE DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE ON 9/2/22. 9/2/22 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RHOADS INDUSTRIES, INC., et al
:
:
v.
:
:
SHORELINE FOUNDATION, INC., et al :
CIVIL ACTION
RHOADS INDUSTRIES, INC., et al
CIVIL ACTION
v.
TRITON MARINE CONSTRUCTION
CORP.
:
:
:
:
:
:
NO. 15-921
NO. 17-266
ORDER
AND NOW, this 2nd day of September, 2022 upon consideration of extensive briefing by
the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties’ Motions in Limine are, as set out in the
attached Memorandum Opinion, DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART as follows:
1. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude Testimony Regarding the Use of the Number of
Refusal/Hard Hits Relative to the Hammer Manufacturers’ Warranties (Dkt. 17-266,
Docs. 209, 210) is DENIED.
2. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude Testimony Regarding Whether Defendants
Should Have Performed Additional Vibration Area Studies (Dkt. 17-266, Doc. 211) is
DENIED.
3. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude Certain Financial Damages Testimony
Regarding Categories of Damages Attributable to Each Sinkhole (Dkt. 17-266, Doc.
212) is DENIED.
4. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude a Claim for Damages Related to Replacement
and/or Repair of Pumps and Other Equipment (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 187) is DENIED.
5. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude Lay Testimony Regarding Dry Dock
Qualifications for Certifications and the Impact of Sinkholes on the Certification
Process (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 188) is DENIED.
6. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Preclude Additional Evidence Related to the Alleged
Assignment Between Plaintiffs and PAID (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 189) is DENIED.
7. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Limit Plaintiff’s Damages Due to Plaintiff’s Failure to
Mitigate Damages (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 190) is DENIED.
8. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Limit Plaintiff’s Damages to the Lesser of Cost of Repair
and the Diminution to the Fair Market Value of the Property (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 191)
is DENIED.
9. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Limit Plaintiff’s Damages as to Alleged Loss of Navy
Projects (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 192) is DENIED.
10. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Evidence of the 2021 Navy Project and the October 28,
2021 Site Visit (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 193) is GRANTED.
11. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Reference to the Opinions of John Vitzthum or Any
Representative of DM Consulting (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 194) is GRANTED.
12. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Evidence of Rhoads’ Recovery of Insurance Proceeds
from American Home Assurance Company or Hartford Fire Insurance Company (Dkt.
15-921, Doc. 195) is GRANTED SUBJECT TO EXCEPTION.
13. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Any Reference to the Lawsuits filed by Plaintiffs Against
the U.S. Navy and Settlement of Those Lawsuits (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 196) is
GRANTED.
14. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Reference to the Appraisals of Rhoads’ Property by
Dunkin Real Estate Advisors (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 197) is GRANTED SUBJECT TO
EXCEPTION.
15. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Defendants from Presenting Arguments or Opinions that
Plaintiffs Can Keep Any Verdict and Not Perform Any Repairs to the Property (Dkt.
15-921, Doc. 198) is GRANTED.
16. Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude Defendants from Presenting Any Argument that Duffield
Associates, Inc. and/or HDR Engineering, Inc. Should Be Included on the Verdict
Sheet (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 199) is GRANTED.
17. Plaintiff’s Motion to Take Judicial Notice of Three Government Documents (Dkt. 15921, Doc. 200) is GRANTED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ David R. Strawbridge, USMJ
DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE
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?