State Court Motion in Limine - Maine

PLAINTIFF'S/DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE

(State of Maine — [Superior Court / District Court])

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Notice of Motion and Hearing
3. Motion in Limine
4. Legal Standard
5. Specific Grounds for Exclusion
6. Request to Instruct Counsel and Admonish Witnesses
7. Conclusion and Requested Relief
8. Signature Block
9. Certificate of Service
10. Exhibit A — Proposed Order

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MAINE
[SUPERIOR COURT / DISTRICT COURT]
[________________] COUNTY

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

2. NOTICE OF MOTION AND HEARING

TO: ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on [Hearing Date] at [Hearing Time], or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the above-entitled court located at [Courthouse Address, City, Maine], before the Honorable [Judge Name], [Moving Party Name] ("Moving Party") will, and hereby does, move this Court, in advance of trial, for an order excluding the evidence, testimony, argument, and references described below, and prohibiting any mention of those matters before the jury until their admissibility is determined outside the jury's presence.

This Motion is based on this Notice, the grounds and authorities set forth below, the pleadings and record on file in this action, and any further evidence or argument that may be presented at or before the hearing.

3. MOTION IN LIMINE

Moving Party respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to the Maine Rules of Evidence and the Court's inherent authority to manage the conduct of trial, for an order in limine:

1. Excluding the categories of evidence, testimony, and argument identified in Section 5 below;
2. Prohibiting counsel, parties, and witnesses from offering, mentioning, referring to, or alluding to those matters in the presence of the jury — including during voir dire, opening statement, examination of witnesses, and closing argument — until the Court has ruled on admissibility outside the jury's presence; and
3. Directing opposing counsel to instruct and admonish each of their witnesses, before the witness testifies, not to volunteer or refer to the excluded matters.

A motion in limine permits the Court to rule on evidentiary questions before trial, avoiding the prejudice that can result when a jury hears inadmissible matter even if the Court later sustains an objection or gives a curative instruction. The grounds below are stated separately so the Court may grant the Motion in whole or in part.

4. LEGAL STANDARD

Relevance — M.R. Evid. 401, 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. M.R. Evid. 401. Relevant evidence is generally admissible, and irrelevant evidence is not admissible. M.R. Evid. 402.

Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time — M.R. Evid. 403. The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. M.R. Evid. 403.

Character and Other Acts — M.R. Evid. 404. Evidence of a person's character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. Evidence of any other crime, wrong, or act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show conduct in conformity; it may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. M.R. Evid. 404.

Hearsay — M.R. Evid. 801 to 807. Hearsay is inadmissible unless an exclusion or exception applies.

Subsequent Remedial Measures, Compromise, and Insurance — M.R. Evid. 407, 408, 411. Evidence of subsequent remedial measures is not admissible to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for warning; compromise offers and negotiations are not admissible to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim; and evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove negligence or wrongful conduct.

Expert Testimony — M.R. Evid. 702. A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion if the expert's specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue. M.R. Evid. 702.

Expert-Reliability Standard in Maine — Maine's Own Standard (not strict Daubert/Frye). Maine does not adhere strictly to either the Daubert or Frye test. Instead, Maine applies its own reliability approach under M.R. Evid. 702, established in State v. Williams, 388 A.2d 500 (Me. 1978), and clarified in State v. Bickart, 963 A.2d 183 (Me. 2009). Expert testimony is admissible only if it is relevant, will assist the trier of fact, and satisfies a threshold level of reliability; in assessing reliability the court may consider, among other factors, whether the supporting studies rest on facts similar to those at issue, whether the methodology has been subject to peer review, whether the conclusion is tailored to the facts of the case, whether other experts attest to reliability, the nature of the expert's qualifications, and, where causation is asserted, whether there is a scientific basis for the asserted relationship.

5. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR EXCLUSION

Moving Party requests that the Court exclude the following evidence, testimony, argument, and references:

Ground 1 — Irrelevant Evidence (M.R. Evid. 401, 402)

☐ Any evidence, testimony, or argument concerning [________________________________], which has no tendency to make any fact of consequence more or less probable and is therefore irrelevant and inadmissible.

Ground 2 — Unfairly Prejudicial Evidence (M.R. Evid. 403)

☐ Any evidence, testimony, or argument concerning [________________________________], the probative value of which is substantially outweighed by a danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.

Ground 3 — Character Evidence and Prior Bad Acts (M.R. Evid. 404, 405)

☐ Any evidence of [the opposing party's / a witness's] character, character trait, or other crimes, wrongs, or acts — including [________________________________] — offered to show action in conformity with character. Such evidence is admissible, if at all, only for a permitted non-propensity purpose under M.R. Evid. 404(b), and only after a determination of admissibility outside the jury's presence.

Ground 4 — Impeachment by Prior Convictions / Specific Conduct (M.R. Evid. 608, 609)

☐ Any reference to [________________________________] (prior conviction, arrest, charge, or specific instance of conduct) offered to attack the credibility of [witness/party], where the conviction or conduct is inadmissible, too remote, or more prejudicial than probative under M.R. Evid. 608 and 609.

Ground 5 — Hearsay (M.R. Evid. 802)

☐ Any out-of-court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted — including [________________________________] — for which no exclusion or exception under M.R. Evid. 801, 803, or 804 applies.

Ground 6 — Subsequent Remedial Measures (M.R. Evid. 407)

☐ Any evidence that, after the occurrence at issue, [a party] made repairs, changes, or other measures that would have made the harm less likely — including [________________________________] — offered to prove negligence, culpable conduct, a defect, or a need for warning.

Ground 7 — Settlement, Compromise, and Negotiations (M.R. Evid. 408)

☐ Any evidence of offers, acceptance, or statements made in compromise negotiations concerning the disputed claim — including [________________________________] — offered to prove or disprove the validity or amount of the claim or to impeach by prior inconsistent statement.

Ground 8 — Liability Insurance (M.R. Evid. 411)

☐ Any evidence or reference to whether [a party] was or was not insured against liability — including [________________________________] — offered on the issue of negligence or wrongful conduct.

Ground 9 — Unreliable or Unqualified Expert Testimony (M.R. Evid. 702)

☐ Any opinion testimony of [expert name / category], including [________________________________], that fails Maine's reliability standard under M.R. Evid. 702 (State v. Williams) because [the witness is not qualified / the opinion will not assist the trier of fact / the methodology lacks the requisite threshold reliability / the conclusion is not tailored to the facts / the opinion lacks a scientific basis for the asserted causal relationship]. Moving Party requests a hearing outside the jury's presence to determine admissibility.

Ground 10 — "Golden Rule" Argument and Appeals to Sympathy or Passion

☐ Any argument or suggestion inviting jurors to place themselves in the position of [a party] ("golden rule" argument), or any appeal to sympathy, passion, prejudice, bias, or community concerns unrelated to the evidence — including [________________________________].

Ground 11 — Other

☐ Any evidence, testimony, argument, or reference concerning [________________________________], inadmissible under [M.R. Evid. ____ / other authority], for the reasons that [________________________________].

6. REQUEST TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL AND ADMONISH WITNESSES

Moving Party respectfully requests that the Court order that opposing counsel, the parties, and all witnesses:

1. Refrain from offering, mentioning, referring to, or alluding to any of the excluded matters in the presence of the jury — including during voir dire, opening statement, examination of witnesses, objections, and closing argument;
2. Refrain from offering the excluded evidence without first approaching the bench and obtaining a ruling from the Court outside the jury's presence; and
3. Instruct and admonish each of their witnesses, before the witness takes the stand, not to volunteer, mention, or refer to any of the excluded matters.

A violation of an order in limine may be addressed by curative instruction, mistrial, or other appropriate sanction.

7. CONCLUSION AND REQUESTED RELIEF

WHEREFORE, [Moving Party] respectfully requests that the Court:

1. GRANT this Motion in Limine [in whole / as to Grounds [________________]];
2. EXCLUDE the evidence, testimony, argument, and references identified above;
3. ORDER counsel, parties, and witnesses to refrain from referencing the excluded matters before the jury and to seek a ruling outside the jury's presence before offering them;
4. DIRECT opposing counsel to admonish their witnesses accordingly; and
5. GRANT such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

8. SIGNATURE BLOCK

Dated: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: ______________________________
[Attorney Name] (Maine Bar No. [________________])
[Address]
[City, State ZIP]
[Telephone] | [Email]
Attorney for [Moving Party] [________________]

9. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion in Limine and Proposed Order was served on all counsel of record by:

☐ Maine Judicial Branch electronic filing/service (where applicable)
☐ U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid
☐ Email to [________________________________]
☐ Hand delivery

Served upon:
[________________________________] (Name)
[________________________________] (Firm)
[________________________________] (Address)
[________________________________] (Email)

______________________________
[Attorney Name] (Maine Bar No. [________________])

EXHIBIT A — PROPOSED ORDER

STATE OF MAINE
[SUPERIOR COURT / DISTRICT COURT]
[________________] COUNTY

ORDER ON MOTION IN LIMINE

This matter came before the Court on [Moving Party]'s Motion in Limine. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, any opposition, and the record, and being fully advised, ORDERS:

1. The Motion in Limine is GRANTED [in whole / in part] as follows:

☐ Ground 1 (Irrelevant Evidence) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 2 (Unfair Prejudice) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 3 (Character / Prior Bad Acts) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 4 (Impeachment) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 5 (Hearsay) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 6 (Subsequent Remedial Measures) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 7 (Settlement / Compromise) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 8 (Liability Insurance) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 9 (Expert Testimony) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 10 (Golden Rule / Sympathy) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED
☐ Ground 11 (Other) — GRANTED / DENIED / RESERVED

2. Counsel, the parties, and all witnesses shall not offer, mention, refer to, or allude to the excluded matters in the presence of the jury, and shall approach the bench for a ruling outside the jury's presence before offering any such matter.

3. Counsel shall instruct and admonish their witnesses in accordance with this Order.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: [__/__/____]

______________________________
Justice/Judge, [Maine Superior Court / District Court]

Sources and References

• Me. R. Evid. 401–404, 702 — Maine Judicial Branch, Maine Rules of Evidence: https://www.courts.maine.gov/rules/text/mr_evid_only_2018-06-29.pdf
• Me. R. Evid. 403 (Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons).
• Me. R. Evid. 702 (Testimony by Expert Witnesses).
• State v. Williams, 388 A.2d 500 (Me. 1978) (Maine expert-reliability standard); State v. Bickart, 963 A.2d 183 (Me. 2009) (clarifying reliability factors).
• Maine Judicial Branch — Court Rules: https://www.courts.maine.gov/rules/