State Court Motion in Limine - Idaho

MOTION IN LIMINE

(State of Idaho — District Court)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Notice of Motion and Hearing
3. Introduction
4. Specific Evidence Sought to Be Excluded (Grounds)
5. Legal Standard
6. Request to Instruct Counsel and Admonish Witnesses
7. Conclusion
8. Certificate of Service
9. Proposed Order (separate document if submitted)

1. CAPTION

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE [________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [________________]

Hearing Date: [__/__/____]
Hearing Time: [____]
Hearing Place: [________________]
Judge: Hon. [________________]
Oral Argument: ☐ Requested ☐ Not Requested
Supporting brief or memorandum: ☐ Filed with motion ☐ Will be filed ☐ None

2. NOTICE OF MOTION AND HEARING

TO: [OPPOSING COUNSEL OF RECORD] AND TO THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on [__/__/____] at [____], or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at [Courthouse Address / Courtroom / Zoom Link], before the Honorable [Judge Name], [Moving Party Name] ("Movant") will, and hereby does, move this Court in limine for an Order prohibiting the [opposing party / all parties], their counsel, and their witnesses from offering, mentioning, referring to, or attempting to convey to the jury in any manner the matters described below, without first obtaining a ruling from the Court outside the presence of the jury.

This Motion is based on this Notice, the accompanying grounds and authorities, the pleadings and records on file, any matters of which the Court may take judicial notice, and such argument and evidence as may be presented at the hearing.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: ______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[IDAHO STATE BAR NO. ________________]
[FIRM ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
[TELEPHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorneys for [Moving Party]

3. INTRODUCTION

Movant respectfully moves under the Idaho Rules of Evidence for an order addressing the specific evidence, testimony, and argument identified below before it is presented to the jury. This action concerns [brief description of the case]. For each ground, Movant identifies the evidence, its anticipated purpose, the applicable rule, and the requested ruling.

4. SPECIFIC EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO BE EXCLUDED (GROUNDS)

Ground 1 — Irrelevant Evidence and Evidence Whose Prejudice Substantially Outweighs Probative Value.
Movant moves to exclude [describe evidence] because it is not relevant within the meaning of I.R.E. 401 and is therefore inadmissible under I.R.E. 402. Alternatively, even if marginally relevant, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence, and it should be excluded under I.R.E. 403.

Ground 2 — Character Evidence and Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.
Movant moves to exclude [describe evidence] offered to prove that a person acted in accordance with a character trait on the occasion at issue. I.R.E. 404(a)(1). Other acts cannot be used to prove conduct by propensity under I.R.E. 404(b)(1). If the proponent identifies another purpose under Rule 404(b)(2), the Court should decide whether that purpose applies and conduct the Rule 403 analysis. [EXPLAIN WHY THE PROFFERED PURPOSE DOES NOT APPLY OR WHY RULE 403 FAVORS EXCLUSION.]

Ground 3 — Improper Impeachment by Specific Instances or Prior Convictions.
Movant moves to exclude [describe] to the extent it relies on extrinsic evidence of a specific instance of conduct to attack a witness's character for truthfulness, contrary to I.R.E. 608(b), or offers a conviction without the hearing and findings required by I.R.E. 609(a). [IDENTIFY THE WITNESS, EVIDENCE, AND PRECISE RULE LIMIT.]

Ground 4 — Inadmissible Hearsay.
Movant moves to exclude [identify each out-of-court statement and its declarant] because the proponent offers it for the truth of the matter asserted under I.R.E. 801(c), and I.R.E. 802 bars hearsay unless another Supreme Court rule permits it. [EXPLAIN WHY RULE 801(d) AND ANY CLAIMED RULE 803 OR 804 EXCEPTION DO NOT APPLY.]

Ground 5 — Subsequent Remedial Measures.
Movant moves to exclude evidence of [describe later measure] offered to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a product or design defect, or a need for a warning or instruction under I.R.E. 407. [EXPLAIN WHY THE MEASURE WOULD HAVE MADE EARLIER HARM LESS LIKELY AND ADDRESS ANY OTHER PURPOSE, SUCH AS IMPEACHMENT OR DISPUTED OWNERSHIP, CONTROL, OR FEASIBILITY.]

Ground 6 — Compromise Offers and Negotiations.
Movant moves to exclude [identify compromise offer or negotiation] offered to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by contradiction, under I.R.E. 408(a). [ADDRESS ANY OTHER PURPOSE CLAIMED UNDER RULE 408(b).]

Ground 7 — Liability Insurance.
Movant moves to exclude [identify insurance evidence] offered to prove negligence or other wrongful conduct under I.R.E. 411. [ADDRESS ANY OTHER PURPOSE CLAIMED, SUCH AS BIAS, AGENCY, OWNERSHIP, OR CONTROL.]

Ground 8 — Expert Qualification or Helpfulness.
Movant moves to exclude the opinions of [expert name] under I.R.E. 702 because [EXPLAIN WHY THE WITNESS LACKS THE CLAIMED KNOWLEDGE, SKILL, EXPERIENCE, TRAINING, OR EDUCATION, OR WHY THE SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE WOULD NOT HELP THE FACTFINDER UNDERSTAND THE EVIDENCE OR DECIDE A FACT IN ISSUE].

Ground 9 — [Additional Case-Specific Ground].
Movant moves to exclude [describe] for the reasons that [state grounds and cite authority].

5. LEGAL STANDARD

A ruling is requested on each specifically identified item under the rule cited for that item.

Relevance. Relevant evidence is admissible unless another applicable rule provides otherwise; irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. I.R.E. 402. Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. I.R.E. 401.

Unfair Prejudice (Rule 403). Under I.R.E. 403, the court may exclude relevant evidence "if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence."

Character and Other Acts (Rule 404). Character evidence is not admissible to prove conduct in conformity therewith, and other-acts evidence is not admissible to prove propensity, though it may be admissible for a non-propensity purpose subject to Rule 403 balancing. I.R.E. 404.

Expert Testimony (Rule 702). The witness must qualify by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the specialized knowledge must help the trier of fact understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue.

Purpose-specific limits. Rules 407, 408, and 411 bar use of the specified evidence for their prohibited purposes and allow other stated purposes in appropriate circumstances.

6. REQUEST TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL AND ADMONISH WITNESSES

Movant further requests that the Court direct opposing counsel, before the jury is brought in, to:

☐ Refrain from offering, mentioning, or alluding to the excluded matters in any manner — including in voir dire, opening statement, examination of witnesses, argument, or closing — without first approaching the bench and obtaining a ruling outside the presence of the jury;
☐ Instruct and admonish each of their witnesses, before the witness testifies, not to volunteer, mention, or refer to any excluded matter; and
☐ Direct counsel to approach the Court before presenting evidence arguably covered by the Order.

7. CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. GRANT this Motion in Limine as to the specific evidence and grounds identified above;
2. DIRECT counsel and witnesses to comply with the Order and refrain from any reference to the excluded matters before the jury; and
3. GRANT such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

DATED: [__/__/____]

______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[Idaho State Bar No. ________________]
Attorney for [Moving Party]

8. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____], I served the foregoing MOTION IN LIMINE and [LIST SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS] on:

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Firm Name]
[Address]
[City, State ZIP]
[Service address or designated electronic service contact]

Manner of service: [FILE AND SERVE / MAIL / HAND DELIVERY / OTHER AUTHORIZED METHOD]

______________________________
[Attorney Name]
[Idaho State Bar No. ________________]

PROPOSED ORDER — SUBMIT AS A SEPARATE DOCUMENT

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE [________________] JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [________________]

ORDER ON MOTION IN LIMINE

The Court, having reviewed [Moving Party]'s Motion in Limine, any response thereto, and the arguments of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, hereby ORDERS that the Motion is GRANTED [in whole / in part] as follows:

1. The following evidence, testimony, argument, and reference is EXCLUDED: [________________________________].
2. Counsel for all parties shall INSTRUCT and ADMONISH their witnesses not to mention, refer to, or volunteer any excluded matter.
3. No party, attorney, or witness shall offer, mention, or allude to any excluded matter in the presence of the jury without first obtaining leave of Court outside the jury's presence.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ______ day of ________________, 20____

______________________________
DISTRICT JUDGE

Sources and References

• Idaho Rules of Evidence (I.R.E.), Article IV (Relevancy) and Article VII (Expert Testimony): https://isc.idaho.gov/rules-procedure/ire
• I.R.E. 403 — Excluding relevant evidence for prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.
• I.R.E. 404 — Character evidence; other crimes, wrongs, or acts.
• I.R.E. 702 — Testimony by expert witnesses: https://isc.idaho.gov/rules-procedure/print/ire/702
• Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure (I.R.C.P.): https://isc.idaho.gov/rules-procedure/ircp