Giterman v. Pocono Medical Center et al
Filing
130
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry),denying 94 MOTION in Limine to Preclude Whitestone Care Center from Introducing Evidence filed by Svetlana Giterman; - Granting in Part and Denying in part 109 101 96 97 107 105 103 111 . (See order for Details).Signed by Honorable Malachy E Mannion on 4/2/19. (bs)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SVETLANA GITERMAN,
:
:
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-0402
:
v.
:
POCONO MEDICAL CENTER,
et al.,
Defendants
(JUDGE MANNION)
:
:
ORDER
In accordance with the memorandum issued this same day, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
(1)
The plaintiff’s motion in limine, (Doc. 94), to preclude WCC
from introducing evidence it received a civil rights clearance
letter from HHS is DENIED.
(2)
the plaintiff’s motion in limine, (Doc. 96), to exclude the
expert testimony and report of Spinelli is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART, as specified in the foregoing
memorandum.
(3)
The plaintiff’s motion in limine, (Doc. 97), to exclude the expert
testimony and report of Sieminski is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART, as specified in the foregoing memorandum.
(4)
WCC’s motion in limine, (Doc. 105), to preclude the plaintiff from
introducing any evidence regarding a “Golden Rule” argument is
GRANTED as unopposed.
(5)
PMC’s motion in limine to exclude entirely or to limit the testimony
Shepard-Kegl, (Doc. 101), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED
IN PART, as specified in the foregoing memorandum.
(6)
WCC’s motions in limine to exclude entirely or to limit the
testimony Shepard-Kegl, (Docs. 103, 107, 109 & 111), are
GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as specified in the
foregoing memorandum.
s/ Malachy E. Mannion
MALACHY E. MANNION
United States District Judge
Date: April 2, 2019
O:\Mannion\shared\MEMORANDA - DJ\CIVIL MEMORANDA\2016 MEMORANDA\16-0402-02-ORDER.wpd
2
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?