Zawicki v. Armstrong et al

Filing 69

ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry), re Motions in Limine Signed by Honorable James M. Munley on 12/8/17. (sm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LEONARD ZAWICKI,
Plaintiff

:
No. 3:16cv453
:
:
(Judge Munley)
v.
:
:
MERWIN ARMSTRONG,
:
JOEL THOMAS BARNEY,
:
individually and d/b/a
:
BARNEY TRUCKING and
:
BARNEY TRUCKING,
:
Defendants
:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ORDER
AND NOW, to wit, this 8th day of December 2017, it is hereby ORDERED
as follows:
1) Plaintiff’s motion in limine to preclude evidence regarding workers’
compensation and Dr. Robert Grob matters (Doc. 26) is hereby DENIED;
2) Plaintiff’s motion in limine to preclude evidence that his pre-September
2, 2016 medical treatment and bills are not causally related to the crash (Doc.
28) is DENIED;
3) Plaintiff’s motion in limine to preclude evidence of his prior car accidents
(Doc. 30) is GRANTED. Evidence of plaintiff’s prior car accidents shall not be
admissible at trial;
4) Plaintiff’s motion in limine to preclude evidence of Defendant
Armstrong’s medical examination reports of September 23, 2011; September 11,
2012 ; and September 11, 2013 (Doc. 32) is hereby DENIED;

5) Defendants’ motion in limine to preclude plaintiff from introducing
evidence of any subsequent accidents of Defendant Merwin Armstrong (Doc. 34)
is ;
6) Defendants’ motion in limine to preclude and limit the testimony
regarding cellular phone usage (Doc. 35) is DENIED;
7) Defendants’ motion in limine to admit medical examination reports and
preclude testimony of plaintiff’s expert Kerry Nelson as to Defenant Armstrong
being not physically qualified to drive a commercial motor vehicle (Doc. 36) is
DENIED;
8) Defendants’ motion in limine to limit the testimony of pliantiff’s expert
Michael Jaloweic, D.O., and to preclude reference to plaintiff’s ability to return to
to work (Doc. 37) is DENIED;
9) Defendants’ motion in limine to preclude plaintiff’s recovery of punitive
damages (Doc. 38) is DENIED;
10) Defendants’ motion in limine to preclude plaintiff from introducing
evidence of Defendant Armstrong’s post-accident employment status at trial
(Doc. 39) is ;
11) Defendants’ motion in limine to preclude plaintiff from introducing the
April 4, 2017 letter from Stephen Dutka at tiral (Doc. 40) is GRANTED as
unopposed; and
12) Defendants’ motion to bifurcate trial (Doc. 57) is hereby DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
s/ James M. Munley
JUDGE JAMES M. MUNLEY
United States District Court

2