Pacheco et al v. United States of America
Filing
164
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE (Dkt. No. 149 ). Plaintiffsmay not recover for lost wages/expenses that would ordinarily be incurred as the result of the birth of a child, but they may recover for the loss of income associated with taking S.L.P. to medical appointments and therapy sessions. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (TH)
Case 2:15-cv-01175-RSL Document 164 Filed 06/01/20 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
6
7
YESENIA PACHECO, et al.,
8
Plaintiffs,
9
10
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
11
Case No. C15-1175RSL
ORDER REGARDING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN
LIMINE
Defendant.
12
13
This matter comes before the Court on “Defendant’s Motion in Limine” regarding
14
the damages phase. Dkt. # 149. Defendant seeks to exclude evidence regarding (a) lost
15
wages or expenses that would ordinarily be incurred as the result of having and raising a
16
child and (b) S.L.P.’s lost future wages or general damages. Having reviewed the
17
submissions of the parties,1 the Court finds as follows:
18
Under Washington law, Ms. Pacheco and Mr. Lemus may “recover those expenses
19
in excess of the cost of the birth and rearing of [a normal child].” Harbeson v.
20
Parke-Davis, Inc., 98 Wn.2d 460, 477 (1983). Both parties are therefore correct: plaintiffs
21
may not recover for lost wages/expenses that would ordinarily be incurred as the result of
22
the birth of a child, but they may recover for the loss of income associated with taking
23
S.L.P. to medical appointments and therapy sessions.
24
25
26
1
The Court has considered plaintiffs’ untimely response and defendant’s reply (which
was authorized by the Court’s case management order, Dkt. # 135 at 1).
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION IN LIMINE - 1
Case 2:15-cv-01175-RSL Document 164 Filed 06/01/20 Page 2 of 2
1
2
With regards to S.L.P.’s claim, Plaintiffs agree that she is entitled to recover only
extraordinary expenses for medical care and special training. Harbeson, 98 Wn.2d at 482.
3
4
5
Dated this 1st day of June, 2020.
A
6
Robert S. Lasnik
United States District Judge
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION IN LIMINE - 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?