State Court Motion in Limine - Illinois

MOTION IN LIMINE

(State of Illinois — Circuit 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. Attorney Signature Block
9. Certificate of Service
10. Exhibit A — Proposed Order

1. CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE [________________] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
[________________] COUNTY, ILLINOIS
[________________] DIVISION / DEPARTMENT

[MOVING PARTY]'S MOTION IN LIMINE

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 counsel may be heard, in [Courtroom] before the Honorable [Judge Name] (or by remote videoconference as ordered), [Moving Party Name] ("Movant") will appear and present its Motion in Limine, a copy of which is served herewith, moving this Court 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.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

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

3. INTRODUCTION

Movant respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to its inherent authority to control the conduct of trial and under the Illinois Rules of Evidence, for an Order in limine excluding the categories of evidence, testimony, argument, and reference identified below. Each category is irrelevant, inadmissible, or so unfairly prejudicial that its mere mention would deprive Movant of a fair trial, and no curative instruction could undo the resulting harm. This action arises out of [brief description of the case].

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 Ill. R. Evid. 401 and is therefore inadmissible under Ill. R. Evid. 402. Alternatively, even if marginally relevant, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence, and it should be excluded under Ill. R. Evid. 403.

Ground 2 — Character Evidence and Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.
Movant moves to exclude [describe evidence] offered to show that a party or witness acted in conformity with a character trait, which is inadmissible under Ill. R. Evid. 404(a). Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove propensity under Ill. R. Evid. 404(b); to the extent offered for a permitted purpose (motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake), it must still survive Ill. R. Evid. 403 balancing.

Ground 3 — Improper Impeachment by Specific Instances or Prior Convictions.
Movant moves to exclude [describe] to the extent offered to attack a witness's character for truthfulness by improper means. See Ill. R. Evid. 608 (evidence of character and conduct of witness) and Ill. R. Evid. 609 (impeachment by evidence of conviction of crime, consistent with People v. Montgomery).

Ground 4 — Inadmissible Hearsay.
Movant moves to exclude [describe statement(s)] as inadmissible hearsay under Ill. R. Evid. 801 and 802, no exception under Ill. R. Evid. 803 or 804 applying.

Ground 5 — Subsequent Remedial Measures.
Movant moves to exclude evidence of [describe repair, design change, policy change, or other measure] taken after the event at issue. Such evidence is inadmissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for a warning or instruction under Ill. R. Evid. 407.

Ground 6 — Compromise and Offers to Compromise.
Movant moves to exclude evidence of [describe settlement discussions / offers]. Such evidence is not admissible to prove liability for, invalidity of, or the amount of a disputed claim under Ill. R. Evid. 408.

Ground 7 — Liability Insurance.
Movant moves to exclude any reference to whether a party was or was not insured against liability. Evidence of liability insurance is not admissible on the issue of whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully under Ill. R. Evid. 411.

Ground 8 — Expert Testimony Based on a New or Novel Scientific Methodology (Frye).
Movant moves to exclude the opinions of [expert name] to the extent they rest on a new or novel scientific methodology or principle. Illinois is a Frye jurisdiction. Under Ill. R. Evid. 702, "[w]here an expert witness testifies to an opinion based on a new or novel scientific methodology or principle, the proponent of the opinion has the burden of showing the methodology or scientific principle on which the opinion is based is sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs." Illinois has expressly declined to adopt the federal Daubert standard. See Donaldson v. Central Illinois Public Service Co., 199 Ill. 2d 63 (2002); In re Commitment of Simons, 213 Ill. 2d 523 (2004). The proponent cannot meet this burden because [methodology is novel and not generally accepted / no Frye foundation / unqualified]. Movant requests a Frye hearing if the proponent contends the methodology is established.

Ground 9 — "Golden Rule" Argument and Appeals to Sympathy, Passion, or Prejudice.
Movant moves to prohibit counsel from asking jurors to place themselves in the position of a party ("Golden Rule" argument) and from any argument calculated to inflame the jury's passion, sympathy, or prejudice. Such argument is improper under Illinois law and excludable under Ill. R. Evid. 403.

Ground 10 — [Additional Case-Specific Ground].
Movant moves to exclude [describe] for the reasons that [state grounds and cite authority].

5. LEGAL STANDARD

A motion in limine is a recognized procedural device permitting a party to obtain a pretrial ruling on the admissibility of evidence so that the jury is not exposed to potentially prejudicial matter before the court can rule. The trial court has broad discretion to grant the motion and to control the presentation of evidence.

Relevance. Only relevant evidence is admissible. Ill. R. Evid. 402. Relevant evidence is evidence having any tendency to make the existence of a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Ill. R. Evid. 401.

Unfair Prejudice (Rule 403). Under Ill. R. Evid. 403, "[a]lthough 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."

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. Ill. R. Evid. 404.

Expert Testimony — Frye (Rule 702). Illinois follows the Frye general-acceptance standard, not Daubert. The proponent of an opinion based on a new or novel scientific methodology must show that the methodology is sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field. Ill. R. Evid. 702; Donaldson; In re Commitment of Simons. A Frye hearing is the proper vehicle to test the admissibility of such novel scientific evidence.

Settlement, Insurance, and Remedial Measures. Evidence of subsequent remedial measures (Ill. R. Evid. 407), compromise (Ill. R. Evid. 408), and liability insurance (Ill. R. Evid. 411) is inadmissible for the prohibited purposes stated in those rules.

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
☐ Treat any violation of the Court's Order as a basis for sanctions, a curative instruction, or a mistrial as the Court deems appropriate.

7. CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. GRANT this Motion in Limine and enter the Proposed Order attached as Exhibit A, excluding the categories of evidence 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.

8. ATTORNEY SIGNATURE BLOCK

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[ARDC No. ________________]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS] | [CITY, STATE ZIP]
[TELEPHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for [Moving Party]

9. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION IN LIMINE was served upon all counsel of record via the Odyssey eFileIL electronic filing/service system (or by [U.S. Mail / email / hand delivery] where electronic service is unavailable) on [__/__/____], in accordance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules 11 and 12, addressed as follows:

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

______________________________
[Attorney Name]
[ARDC No. ________________]

EXHIBIT A — PROPOSED ORDER

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE [________________] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
[________________] COUNTY, ILLINOIS

ORDER ON MOTION IN LIMINE

This matter coming before the Court on [Moving Party]'s Motion in Limine, the Court being fully advised in the premises, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 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.

ENTERED: ______ day of ________________, 20____

______________________________
Judge [________________]

Sources and References

• Illinois Rules of Evidence (Art. IV Relevancy; Art. VII Opinions and Expert Testimony): https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/Resources/2795eb95-0a4d-42ef-b7a8-18b0a7602304/
• Ill. R. Evid. 403 — Exclusion of relevant evidence (prejudice/confusion/waste).
• Ill. R. Evid. 404 — Character evidence; crimes or other acts.
• Ill. R. Evid. 702 — Testimony by experts (codifies Frye for novel scientific evidence; eff. Jan. 1, 2011).
• Donaldson v. Central Illinois Public Service Co., 199 Ill. 2d 63, 767 N.E.2d 314 (2002) — Frye standard.
• In re Commitment of Simons, 213 Ill. 2d 523, 821 N.E.2d 1184 (2004) — Illinois retains Frye, rejects Daubert.
• People v. Montgomery, 47 Ill. 2d 510 (1971) — impeachment by conviction.
• Illinois Supreme Court Rules 11–12 (service) and 137 (signing of pleadings).