Biniek et al v. T.J Maxx/The T.J. Maxx Companies, Inc.

Filing 59

ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry). 1.Marmaxxs motions in limine, (Docs. 30, 32), are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 2.Marmaxxs motion in limine, (Doc. 34), is DENIED IN ITS ENTIRETY.3.Jofrans motion in limine, (Doc. 36), to pre clude lay opinion testimony is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.4.Plaintiffs motion in limine, (Doc. 38), is DENIED, IN PART, WITHOUT PREJUDICE and, DENIED regarding Fergusons opinions that the chair was properly designed and assembled.Signed by Honorable Malachy E Mannion on 9/30/15. (bs)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EDWARD BINIEK and
MARIA BINIEK,

:
:

Plaintiffs

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-1154
:

v
:
MARMAXX OPERATING CORP.
and JOFRAN SALES, INC.,
Defendants

(JUDGE MANNION)

:
:

ORDER
For the reasons stated in the court’s memorandum issued this same
day, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1.

Marmaxx’s motions in limine, (Docs. 30, 32), are DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2.

Marmaxx’s motion in limine, (Doc. 34), is DENIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY.

3.

Jofran’s motion in limine, (Doc. 36), to preclude lay opinion
testimony is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

4.

Plaintiffs’ motion in limine, (Doc. 38), is DENIED, IN PART,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE and, DENIED regarding Ferguson’s
opinions that the chair was properly designed and assembled.

s/ Malachy E. Mannion
MALACHY E. MANNION
United States District Judge
Dated: September 30 , 2015
O:\Mannion\shared\MEMORANDA - DJ\CIVIL MEMORANDA\2014 MEMORANDA\14-1154-01-Order.wpd