State Court Motion in Limine - Alabama

PLAINTIFF'S/DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE

(State of Alabama — Circuit Court)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Notice of Motion and Hearing
3. Motion in Limine

4. Memorandum of Law in Support
   4.1 Introduction
   4.2 The Evidence Sought to Be Excluded
   4.3 Legal Standard
   4.4 Argument — Numbered Grounds
   4.5 Conclusion

5. Certificate of Service

6. Exhibit A — Proposed Order

1. CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF [________________] COUNTY, ALABAMA

Case No.: [________________]

Hearing Date: [__/__/____]
Hearing Time: [________________]
Courtroom: [________________]
Judge: Hon. [________________]

2. NOTICE OF MOTION AND HEARING

TO: ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on [__/__/____] at [________________], or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in [Courtroom] of the above-entitled court, located at [Courthouse Address, City, Alabama], before the Honorable [Judge Name], [Plaintiff / Defendant] [________________] (the "Movant") will, and hereby does, move this Court, in advance of trial and outside the presence of the jury, for an order prohibiting [the opposing party] [________________] ("[Opposing Party]"), and its counsel and witnesses, from offering, mentioning, referring to, interrogating concerning, or attempting to convey to the jury in any manner — directly or indirectly — any of the matters of evidence described below, without first obtaining a ruling from the Court outside the presence and hearing of the jury.

The motion is based on this Notice, the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the Alabama Rules of Evidence, the pleadings and records on file in this action, and any further evidence or argument that may be presented at or before the hearing.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: ______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[ASB-________________]
[FIRM ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
[TELEPHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for [Movant]

3. MOTION IN LIMINE

The Movant respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to its inherent authority to control the conduct of trial and the orderly admission of evidence and pursuant to Ala. R. Evid. 103(d), 104(a) and (c), 401, 402, and 403, for an order in limine excluding the categories of evidence, testimony, argument, and reference identified below. The Movant further requests that the Court instruct opposing counsel to advise and admonish each of its witnesses to comply with the Court's ruling.

4. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT

4.1 Introduction

This is an action for [describe nature of action — e.g., negligence arising from a motor-vehicle collision / breach of contract / products liability]. Trial is set to commence on [__/__/____]. The Movant anticipates that, absent an order from this Court, [Opposing Party] will attempt to introduce or elicit evidence and argument that is irrelevant, inadmissible, and unfairly prejudicial, the mere mention of which before the jury would cause harm that no instruction to disregard could cure. The Movant therefore moves to exclude the matters set forth below.

4.2 The Evidence Sought to Be Excluded

The Movant seeks an order excluding the following specific items of evidence:

1. [________________________________]
2. [________________________________]
3. [________________________________]

4.3 Legal Standard

Relevance (Ala. R. Evid. 401, 402). Evidence is relevant if it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." (Ala. R. Evid. 401.) Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. (Ala. R. Evid. 402.)

Unfair Prejudice / Confusion (Ala. R. Evid. 403). Even relevant evidence "may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence." (Ala. R. Evid. 403.)

Character and Other Acts (Ala. R. Evid. 404, 608, 609). Evidence of a person's character or character trait is generally inadmissible to prove conduct in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, and evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove character to show action in conformity, though it may be admissible for other purposes such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. (Ala. R. Evid. 404(b).) Impeachment by character for truthfulness and by criminal conviction is governed by Ala. R. Evid. 608 and 609.

Hearsay (Ala. R. Evid. 801, 802). Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by the Alabama Rules of Evidence or other rule. (Ala. R. Evid. 802.)

Subsequent Remedial Measures (Ala. R. Evid. 407). Evidence of measures taken after an event that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for a warning.

Compromise / Settlement (Ala. R. Evid. 408). Evidence of offering, promising, or accepting a valuable consideration in compromising a disputed claim — and conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations — is not admissible to prove liability for or the amount of the claim.

Liability Insurance (Ala. R. Evid. 411). Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible on the issue of whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully.

Expert Testimony (Ala. R. Evid. 702; Ala. Code § 12-21-160). Rule 702(a) permits a qualified expert to testify when scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact. For testimony based on a scientific theory, principle, methodology, or procedure, Rule 702(b) and § 12-21-160(b) additionally require sufficient facts or data, reliable principles and methods, and reliable application to the facts. The added subsection (b) standard applies in the proceedings and from the dates stated in the rule and statute; it does not apply to domestic-relations, child-support, juvenile, or probate cases, and the rule separately preserves the statutory treatment of DNA evidence.

Golden-Rule and Improper Appeals to Sympathy or Passion. Argument or evidence inviting the jury to place itself in the position of a party (the "golden rule"), or appealing to sympathy, passion, or prejudice rather than the evidence, is improper and subject to exclusion under Ala. R. Evid. 403 and Alabama decisional law governing improper argument.

4.4 Argument — Numbered Grounds

GROUND 1 — Irrelevant Evidence (Ala. R. Evid. 401, 402).
The Movant moves to exclude [describe evidence] because it has no tendency to prove or disprove any fact of consequence in this action. Specifically, [________________________________]. Because the evidence is irrelevant, it is inadmissible under Ala. R. Evid. 402 and should be excluded.

GROUND 2 — Unfair Prejudice, Confusion, and Waste of Time (Ala. R. Evid. 403).
The Movant moves to exclude [describe evidence] because any minimal probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, and misleading the jury. [________________________________]. The evidence would inflame the jury and divert it from the issues properly before it.

GROUND 3 — Character and Prior Bad Acts (Ala. R. Evid. 404, 608, 609).
The Movant moves to exclude evidence, reference, or argument concerning [describe prior bad acts / character / prior conviction]. Such evidence is offered, if at all, only to suggest that the [party/witness] acted in conformity with a bad character and is therefore barred by Ala. R. Evid. 404. To the extent it is offered to impeach, it fails the requirements and balancing of Ala. R. Evid. 608 and 609 and remains subject to Rule 403.

GROUND 4 — Inadmissible Hearsay (Ala. R. Evid. 801, 802).
The Movant moves to exclude [describe out-of-court statement / document] as inadmissible hearsay offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, for which no exception or exclusion under Ala. R. Evid. 803, 804, or 807 applies.

GROUND 5 — Subsequent Remedial Measures (Ala. R. Evid. 407).
The Movant moves to exclude evidence of [describe post-event repair, change, recall, or policy change] offered to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for a warning, in violation of Ala. R. Evid. 407.

GROUND 6 — Settlement, Compromise, and Offers (Ala. R. Evid. 408).
The Movant moves to exclude all evidence, reference, or argument concerning settlement discussions, offers of compromise, or statements made during compromise negotiations, which are inadmissible under Ala. R. Evid. 408.

GROUND 7 — Liability Insurance (Ala. R. Evid. 411).
The Movant moves to exclude any evidence, reference, or argument that any party was or was not covered by liability insurance, which is inadmissible on the issue of fault under Ala. R. Evid. 411.

GROUND 8 — Expert Testimony (Ala. R. Evid. 702; Ala. Code § 12-21-160).
The proposed testimony of [Expert Name] is: ☐ scientific ☐ technical ☐ other specialized knowledge. If the testimony is scientific and the additional subsection (b) standard applies to this proceeding, the Movant contends that it is not based on sufficient facts or data, is not the product of reliable principles and methods, and/or has not been reliably applied to the facts. If subsection (b) does not apply, state the separate Rule 702(a), qualification, helpfulness, Rule 403, and controlling-authority grounds actually raised: [________________________________].

GROUND 9 — Golden-Rule Argument and Appeals to Sympathy or Passion (Ala. R. Evid. 403).
The Movant moves to prohibit opposing counsel from making any "golden rule" argument asking jurors to place themselves in the position of a party, and from any argument or evidence appealing to sympathy, passion, or prejudice rather than the evidence.

GROUND 10 — [Additional Ground].
[________________________________]

4.5 Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the Movant respectfully requests that this Court GRANT this Motion in Limine; ORDER that [Opposing Party], its counsel, and its witnesses refrain from offering, mentioning, or alluding to the excluded matters in the presence or hearing of the jury, whether during voir dire, opening statement, examination of witnesses, or closing argument, without first approaching the bench and obtaining leave of Court outside the jury's presence; DIRECT counsel to instruct and admonish their witnesses accordingly; and GRANT such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

5. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a copy of the foregoing Motion in Limine and all accompanying papers was served via [AlaFile e-service / hand delivery / first-class mail] upon the following counsel of record:

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Firm Name]
[Address]
[City, State ZIP]
[Email]

______________________________
[Attorney Name]
[ASB-________________]

EXHIBIT A — PROPOSED ORDER

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF [________________] COUNTY, ALABAMA

Case No.: [________________]

ORDER ON MOTION IN LIMINE

Upon consideration of the Movant's Motion in Limine, any response thereto, and the arguments of counsel, the Court finds the Motion is due to be GRANTED as set forth below. It is therefore ORDERED:

1. The following evidence, testimony, argument, and reference is EXCLUDED: [________________________________].
2. [Opposing Party], its counsel, and its witnesses shall not offer, mention, refer to, or attempt to convey to the jury — directly or indirectly — any of the excluded matters during voir dire, opening statement, the examination of witnesses, or closing argument, without first obtaining leave of Court outside the presence and hearing of the jury.
3. Counsel for [Opposing Party] shall instruct and admonish each of its witnesses to comply with this Order.

Ruling on each numbered ground:

☐ GROUND 1 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 2 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 3 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 4 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 5 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 6 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 7 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 8 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 9 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐
☐ GROUND 10 — GRANTED ☐ / DENIED ☐ / RESERVED for trial ☐

DONE and ORDERED this ______ day of ________________, 20____.

______________________________
Circuit Judge

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Alabama Rules of Evidence (Ala. R. Evid.), Article IV (Relevancy and Its Limits), Rules 401–411; Article VI (Witnesses), Rules 607–609; Article VII (Opinions and Expert Testimony), Rules 701–705; Article VIII (Hearsay): https://judicial.alabama.gov/library/rules
• Ala. R. Evid. 403 — Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time
• Ala. R. Evid. 404 — Character Evidence; Crimes or Other Acts
• Ala. R. Evid. 702 — Testimony by Experts: https://judicial.alabama.gov/docs/library/rules/ev702.pdf
• Ala. Code § 12-21-160 — Expert Witnesses (scientific-evidence reliability standard): https://alison.legislature.state.al.us/code-of-alabama?section=12-21-160
• Mazda Motor Corp. v. Hurst, 261 So. 3d 167 (Ala. 2017) (applying the Daubert amendment)
• Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) (historical general-acceptance authority; the Rule 702 amendment notes state that subsection (b) supplanted Frye for scientific evidence, with limited exceptions)